Testamentary promises

Question 1

Key ratios in Jones v Public trustee

Answer 1

• A promise can be expressed or implied
• A promise can be motivated through family/moral obligation. Can be motivated through gratidude.

Question 2

Key ratios in Re Greenfield

Answer 2

• A lack of corroborating evidence is not fatal to a claim
• Work and services can be intangible things

Question 3

Key ratios in Wilson v Wilson

Answer 3

-Relevant considerations – values/significance to promisor – did they specifically request it – Duration of what was done
- when assessing whether it gave rise to a promise to make testamentary provision, the Court will consider whether the reasonable layperson in the shoes of the Promisee would have understood the words to mean.

Question 4

Key ratios in Chapman v P

Answer 4

• Qualifying work/services will depend on what is ordinary/expected in the particular family group
• Focus on what the promisor’s state of mind (must intend to connect their promise to work/services)

Question 5

Key ratios in Growden v Moreland

Answer 5

• A promise cannot be too vague

Question 6

Key ratios in Byrne v Bishop

Answer 6

• Services can be intangible things – e.g. Emotional support
• must go beyond the normal expectations of family life or interaction
• the motive of the person performing the work/services is of little importance when determining if a claim has been established.
• No requirement that the promise benefits the person performing the work/services. - services can be performed by a parent, in fulfilment of a promise to benefit their child
• Bring motivated by affection/other considerations is not fatal to the establishment of nexus – Nexus can be established even if the promise is only part to reward for services, and in part motivated by other considerations