Epple v Stone [1906] HCA 9

The daughters took as tenants in common, and upon the death of one of them, her representatives were entitled to one-half of the income during the life of the surviving daughter, as the will treated the daughters' shares as independent and going to their own children only, with no controlling words to disturb the tenancy in common.

Parties: Appellant: Jessie Jane Epple; Defendant: Anne Dunlop Russell (deceased); Respondent Trustee: Stone; Respondent: Hilda Beatrice de Garis
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 23 March 1906
Procedural Posture: Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of Victoria
Outcome: appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Will Construction, Tenancy in Common, Gift Over, Life Estate

Succession Law Will Construction Tenancy in Common Gift Over Life Estate

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2

Parties

Jessie Jane Epple

Appellant

Anne Dunlop Russell (deceased)

Defendant

Stone

Respondent Trustee

Hilda Beatrice de Garis

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of Victoria

Legal Issues

1 Did the testator's daughters take the income from the trust estate as joint tenants or tenants in common?
2 Are representatives of a deceased daughter entitled to one-half of the income during the life of the surviving daughter?

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

each party to pay their own costs
trustees' costs as between solicitor and client to be paid from the trust estate as directed by Supreme Court order