The applicant brought a motion challenging the validity of several clauses in a will that conditioned her inheritance on compliance with certain directives of the testator.
The court considered whether a clause prohibiting any challenge to the will constituted an in terrorem clause and whether other conditional gifts were void for uncertainty or contrary to public policy.
The court held that the clause forbidding any litigation against the estate was void as an impermissible in terrorem clause because it imposed a bare forfeiture without a gift over.
One condition that disinherited the beneficiary if she were merely investigated or charged with inappropriate care was also declared void as contrary to public policy.
Other conditions relating to hospital admission and life‑prolonging treatment were upheld, and a clause giving the executrix discretion to distribute the estate if the beneficiary breached the conditions was not invalidated.
