Grant v Grant; Grant v Grant (No. 2)

In the case of Grant v Grant, the deceased, who was an elderly person, had executed a power of attorney in favour of his eldest daughter. This power of attorney allowed her to manage his financial affairs. The deceased later transferred his home to his daughter's own daughter, either for no consideration or for a nominal consideration of $900,000, with no formal security provided post-transfer. Additionally, the eldest daughter transferred money from the deceased's bank accounts, leaving him without the means to pay for his nursing home expenses. Following the deceased's death, the estate sought to recover the property and an account of the transferred money, arguing that the transactions were in breach of fiduciary duty, unconscionable, or beyond the scope of the authority granted by the power of attorney.

The primary legal issues revolved around whether the transactions between the deceased and his eldest daughter were within the scope of the authority granted by the power of attorney, whether they constituted a breach of fiduciary duty, and whether they were unconscionable. The court also had to determine whether the plaintiff, the deceased's eldest daughter, had been left without adequate provision for her maintenance, education, or advancement in life under the terms of her mother's will, and if any conduct on her part disentitled her from making a claim on her deceased mother's estate.

The court examined the nature and scope of the power of attorney and the transactions conducted under it, finding that the transfer of the home and the withdrawals from the deceased's accounts were not within the usual scope of such powers. It was held that the eldest daughter had acted unconscionably and in breach of her fiduciary duty by transferring the deceased's home and withdrawing funds without proper consideration or security, leaving the deceased unable to meet his essential living expenses. The court also found that the plaintiff, the deceased's eldest daughter, had not been left with adequate provision for her maintenance, education, or advancement in life under her mother's will and that her conduct did not disentitle her from making a claim on the estate.

The court ordered the recovery of the property and an account of the moneys transferred from the deceased's accounts, finding that the transactions were unconscionable and beyond the scope of the authority granted by the power of attorney. The court also granted the plaintiff a portion of the estate, recognising that she had been left without adequate provision for her maintenance, education, and advancement in life.