In the Supreme Court of Queensland decision Mann v Mann & Ors [2024] QSC 50, the dispute revolved around the interpretation of the will of Geoffrey Gordon Mann, deceased. The applicant, Graeme Peter Mann, sought a declaration to have the land returned by the State Government and compensation received from the Council for a portion of the farm considered as part of the property left to the children per the will. The first respondent, Nan Ellen Mann, executor of Geoffrey's will, argued these should form part of the estate's residue. Justice Henry dismissed the application, clarifying that both the returned land and council compensation were not to be included in the specific gift to the children as outlined in the will but rather formed part of the estate’s residue. This decision leaned heavily on the intention behind Geoffrey Mann's will, evidenced by the specific inclusion of lot numbers and plans which did not encompass the contested land and compensation. Therefore, the land and compensation were deemed part of the residue, aligning with Geoffrey's intentions as deduced from the will’s construct and the extrinsic evidence provided.
top of page
bottom of page