Coote v Price

In the case of Coote v Price, the dispute arose from an agreement made in California by the deceased, Price, to maintain life insurance policies for the benefit of his former wife, Coote, and to leave half of his interest in a hotel business in New South Wales to two of his daughters. Price's estate was administered according to a will inconsistent with the Californian agreement, which only provided for the daughters to benefit from the business after the death of Price's de facto partner. The central legal issues involved the enforceability of the Californian agreement under New South Wales law, the application of Californian law in determining the validity of the agreement, and the imposition of a constructive trust over Price's share in the business in favour of his daughters.

The court first considered whether the law of California was the same as that of New South Wales, a question of private international law. It determined that there was no presumption that the laws of the two jurisdictions were the same, and therefore, Californian law was applicable. The court then examined whether Coote was entitled to enforce the Californian agreement against Price's estate. It found that the agreement constituted a promise to maintain the life insurance policies and to leave a share in the hotel business to the daughters, which Price failed to fulfil. Consequently, Coote was entitled to damages for breach of the agreement.

The court further considered whether Coote could enforce the Californian agreement on behalf of the daughters. It concluded that Coote held the benefit of the agreement on trust for the daughters, and therefore, she could enforce the agreement against Price's estate on their behalf. Finally, the court addressed the issue of imposing a constructive trust over Price's share in the business in favour of his daughters pending the taking of an account. It found that such a trust should be imposed to ensure that the daughters received the benefit of the agreement as promised.

The court ordered that Coote was entitled to damages for breach of the Californian agreement and that a constructive trust should be imposed over Price's share in the hotel business in favour of his daughters.