That seems to be the case - the courts just won't accept what s90 clearly means!! As long as there's no mistake on the face of the will then there's nothing to interpret going by Rowe v Law
On Oct 8, 2:21 pm, the gaffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is the situation now that basically s90 succesion Act basically had no > effect and If a situation such as Re Julian comes up extrinsic > evidence can't be admitted coz the will makes sense,even though it's > clearly a mistake and not the testator's intention (Rowe v Law > reaffirmed by Re Collins and Lynch v Burke)?? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FE-1 Study Group" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.ie/group/FE-1-Study-Group?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
