Court of Appeal: 1) dismisses appeal of High Court ruling that a plaintiff was entitled to the lands left in his father's will on the basis of promises made to him, finding that the equity of the case means compensation in purely monetary terms would not be a sufficient satisfaction of his claim; and 2) allows appeal of High Court ruling that the plaintiff was entitled to a bequest of €150,000 in addition to the lands and his costs, finding that the justice between the parties requires that the plaintiff should receive a transfer of the entire lands, but conditioned on his executing a disclaimer of so much of the bequest of €150,000 left to him under the Will as he would stand to receive, and the plaintiff should only receive 75% of his costs.
Probate law – validity of a will – duress and/or the undue influence – promissory estoppel – whether the trial judge erred in deciding that the plaintiff’s equitable claim should be satisfied by the transfer of the entire of the lands to the plaintiff – appeal of costs order – whether the plaintiff was entitled to the lands on the basis of promises made to him – whether the award of the entire farm to the plaintiff is excessive and disproportionate to the detriment suffered – Snell’s Equity, 33rd ed. – bequest of €150,000 – plaintiff received not only the lands as promised by the deceased, but also the bequest of €150,000 under the 2006 which was clearly intended by the deceased to be in substitution for the lands – whether the plaintiff acted reasonably by including a claim based on undue influence in his proceedings at the time they were instituted – plaintiff should be awarded 75% of his costs in the High Court – appeal dismissed save in respect of €150,000 bequest and costs.