In a judgment handed down last Thursday, the Chief Justice found that a clause leaving ““any real estate that I own at the date of my death” did not encompass the repayment of a loan due following the termination of sublease of a unit in a retirement village.

The case highlights how careful solicitors have to be when drafting wills dealing with interests in real estate, and in ascertaining the exact legal nature of the client’s interest.

Read Whitla v Launchbury [2014] QSC 70 here.

One thought on “Retirement village loan repayment not “real estate”

  1. That’s just wrong, I doubt that the testator’s intention was for his son to get the lions share, and I doubt that the testator was aware of the difference in contract law and property law, looks to me like the refund from the loan was tied to the real estate but for the unit and sub lease there would not have been a loan, it didn’t stand on it’s own. This is not just about solicitor’s checking their facts its also about the dubious legal ramifications of retirement villages.


Comments are closed.