Mortensen, Reid (2002) Solicitors' will-making duties. Melbourne University Law Review, 26 (1). pp. 60-87. ISSN 0025-8938
Metadata
| HTML Citation | EndNote | Dublin Core | Reference Manager |
Full text available as:
| PDF (Published Version) - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader 216Kb | |
| PDF (Permission) - Archive staff only - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader 30Kb |
Official URL: http://mulr.law.unimelb.edu.au/
Abstract
Since the recognition that, in will-making practice, solicitors owe duties to beneficiaries as well as to clients, the courts have stated solicitors' will-making duties with some precision. However the law of tort still fails to offer an agreed rationale for them. This article suggests that, tortious principles aside, these duties spring from a clearer articulation of the solicitor's professional role as caretaker of clients' testamentary intentions. This idea explains most adjudication on will-making, while placing reasonably clear limits on solicitors' liabilities. This article's theory of the solicitor's caretaking role is the basis of its criticism of Queensland Art Gallery Board of Trustees v Henderson Trout (a firm) — where duties to one who merely hoped to be a beneficiary were recognised — and its conclusion that the duties stated there are conceptually precarious and practically unsustainable.
| Item Type: | Article (Commonwealth Reporting Category C) |
|---|---|
| Additional Information: | Final published version supplied by, and deposited with the permission of the publisher. |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | wills; will-making; solicitors |
| Fields of Research (FOR2008): | 18 Law and Legal Studies > 1801 Law > 180126 Tort Law |
| Subjects: | 390000 Law, Justice and Law Enforcement > 390100 Law > 390117 Tort Law |
| Socio-Economic Objective (SEO2008): | UNSPECIFIED |
| ID Code: | 5007 |
| Deposited By: | |
| Deposited On: | 30 Mar 2009 17:00 |
| Last Modified: | 25 Jan 2010 15:48 |
Archive Staff Only: edit this record
