Groundwater v Robinson - [2020] QSC 31

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: Groundwater v Robinson [2020] QSC 31
PARTIES: In BS 4245 of 2016:
GAIL GROUNDWATER
(applicant)
v
MATTHEW KARL ROBINSON AS EXECUTOR OF
JAMES FRANCIS DAVID ROBINSON, DECEASED
(respondent)
In BS 4098 of 2018:
GAIL GROUNDWATER
(applicant)
v
MATTHEW KARL ROBINSON AS EXECUTOR OF
JAMES FRANCIS DAVID ROBINSON, DECEASED
(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

BS No 4245 of 2016 BS No 4098 of 2018
DIVISION: Trial Division
PROCEEDING: Application
ORIGINATING Supreme Court at Brisbane
COURT:
DELIVERED ON: 6 March 2020
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARING DATE: 7 November 2019
JUDGE: Davis J
ORDER: Orders in terms of Schedules 2 and 3 to these reasons.

CATCHWORDS:

EQUITY – TRUSTS AND TRUSTEES – APPLICATIONS TO COURT FOR ADVICE AND AUTHORITY – PETITION OR SUMMONS FOR ADVICE – GENERALLY – where
applications were brought by the administrator of the estate of
the deceased – where administrator seeks the dissolution of
family provision orders, in order to sell a property of the estate
– where administrator seeks to have the applicant’s caveat over
that property removed, in order to sell the property – where

administrator seeks judicial advice and declarations pursuant to s 96(2) of the Trusts Act 1973 before embarking upon settlement with one respondent and action against other parties
– whether the orders should be dissolved and judicial advice
given
Succession Act 1981, ss 6, 42
Trusts Act 1973, s 96
Corbiere & Anor v Dulley & Ors [2016] QSC 134, cited
Glassock v Trust Company (Australia) Pty Ltd [2012] QSC
15, cited
Macedonian Orthodox Community Church St Petka Inc v His
Eminence Petar Diocesan Bishop of the Macedonian
Orthodox Diocese of Australia and New Zealand (2008) 237
CLR 66, followed
MTM Funds Management Ltd v Cabalane Holdings Pty Ltd
(2000) 158 FLR 121, applied
COUNSEL: In both BS 4245 of 2016 and BS 4098 of 2018:
G R Dickson for Gail Groundwater
J I Otto for the administrator Carla Parsons
J H Crowther (solicitor) for the former executor Matthew
Karl Robinson
A G Rae for Prudence Poole, the Litigation Guardian of the
infant beneficiaries, Oliver Robinson, Talia Robinson, Thor
Robinson and Rueben Robinson
Margaret Robinson appeared in person
James Robinson appeared in person[1]
SOLICITORS: Attwood Marshall for Gail Groundwater
Parsons Law for the administrator Carla Parsons
Whitehead Crowther Lawyers for the former executor
Matthew Karl Robinson
McInnes Wilson Lawyers for the Litigation Guardian of the
infant beneficiaries
Margaret Robinson appeared in person
James Robinson appeared in person
[1] James Robinson is Scott James Robinson. He is referred to in the statement of facts as Scott James Robinson.

Applications were brought by Carla Parsons as administrator of the estate of James Francis David Robinson (the deceased). She seeks judicial advice and declarations pursuant to s 96(2) of the Trusts Act 1973,[2] and various other orders concerning the administration of the estate.
[2] There is also power under s 6 of the Succession Act 1981 to give advice and directions.
Background
An application under s 96 of the Trusts Act

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Groundwater v Robinson

Details

AGLC: Groundwater v Robinson [2020] QSC 31
Case: [2020] QSC 31
Decision Date: 6 March 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Groundwater v Robinson, Carla Parsons, as administrator of the estate of James Francis David Robinson, brought an application for judicial advice and declarations under section 96(2) of the Trusts Act 1973, and other orders concerning the administration of the estate. The deceased left a will dated 6 November 2008, appointing David Chalk and Matthew Karl Robinson as executors and trustees. After Mr Chalk renounced his position, Matthew became the sole executor and trustee. Probate was granted to Matthew on 2 February 2016. The deceased was survived by his de facto partner Gail Groundwater, three sons, grandchildren, friends, and associates. Interim dividends were paid to beneficiaries, with some money held in trust for minors until they reached 25 years of age. Investigations revealed the estate's value at death to be $2,258,520.98, with Gail Groundwater receiving a one percent share, equivalent to approximately $20,000. Ms Groundwater filed an application for family provision under Part 4 of the Succession Act 1981, which was settled between her and Matthew, resulting in additional provision for Ms Groundwater.

The legal issues before the court included whether Carla Parsons, as the administrator, could secure the money held in trust for minor beneficiaries and if the estate's distribution complied with the deceased's will. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the provision made to Ms Groundwater was adequate under the Succession Act 1981. The court was required to determine whether the deceased's estate was administered properly, whether the minor beneficiaries' funds were appropriately secured, and if the family provision application was satisfactorily resolved.

The court reasoned that the application for judicial advice was valid under section 96 of the Trusts Act and that Carla Parsons, as the administrator, had the authority to secure the trust funds for minor beneficiaries. The court found that the estate was administered in accordance with the deceased's will, with proper interim dividends distributed. The court also concluded that the compromise reached between Ms Groundwater and Matthew sufficiently addressed her family provision application, as it resulted in additional provision for her. The court granted the declarations and orders sought by Carla Parsons, ensuring the proper administration of the estate and the securement of funds for minor beneficiaries.

Orders

Orders of the court

Orders in terms of Schedules 2 and 3 to these reasons.

Background

Background to the litigation

Applications were brought by Carla Parsons as administrator of the estate of James Francis David Robinson (the deceased). She seeks judicial advice and declarations pursuant to s 96(2) of the Trusts Act 1973,[2] and various other orders concerning the administration of the estate. [2] There is also power under s 6 of the Succession Act 1981 to give advice and directions. Background An application under s 96 of the Trusts Act may only be made upon a written statement of facts. Schedule “1” to these reasons is that statement.[3] It is therefore only necessary to briefly explain the context of the applications. [3] Without attachments, but with redactions. The deceased died on 30 July 2015. The deceased left a will dated 6 November 2008 (the will). By the will, the deceased appointed David Chalk and Matthew Karl Robinson (Matthew) as his executors and trustees. Mr Chalk renounced his office as executor leaving Matthew as the sole executor and trustee of the estate. Probate of the will was granted to Matthew on 2 February 2016. The deceased was survived by his de facto partner Gail Groundwater, his three sons, Matthew, Kirk William Francis Robinson (Kirk) and Scott James Francis Robinson (Scott),[4] a number of grandchildren, friends and associates. [4] Who is known by the given name “James”, but who I will call “Scott” because that is how he is Various particular bequests were made in the will and then the residue was to be split in specified shares amongst named relatives and friends. During his administration of the estate, Matthew paid interim dividends. Some of that money passed to the infant beneficiaries. Pursuant to the will, that money is to be held in trust until the infant beneficiaries reach 25 years of age. After being appointed as administrator, Ms Parsons moved to secure that money which is now in accounts of which she is the trustee. There are trust accounts for five beneficiaries. Four have not reached 25 years of age. They are: Oliver Robinson, Talia Robinson, Thor Robinson and Rueben Robinson. One of the beneficiaries has since attained the age of 25 years. That is Grace Robinson. Investigations have revealed that at the time of his death, the value of the deceased’s estate was $2,258,520.98. One of the assets was a home unit at a high rise apartment block in Surfers Paradise called “Condor” (the Condor unit). One of the beneficiaries to share in the residue was Gail Groundwater who was gifted a one percent share. This equated to a little over $20,000. Ms Groundwater had been the deceased’s partner for about 18 years by the time of his death and she took the view that inadequate provision had been made for her by the deceased. She filed an application for family provision pursuant to Part 4 of the Succession Act 1981. This was application BS 4245 of 2016 (the 2016 application). Ms Groundwater’s application for family provision was settled between her and Matthew as the executor of the estate. That compromise resulted in provision being made for Ms Groundwater as follows:

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Groundwater v Robinson [2020] QSC 31
PARTIES:	In BS 4245 of 2016: GAIL GROUNDWATER
(applicant)
v MATTHEW KARL ROBINSON AS EXECUTOR OF JAMES FRANCIS DAVID ROBINSON, DECEASED
(respondent)
In BS 4098 of 2018: GAIL GROUNDWATER
(applicant)
v MATTHEW KARL ROBINSON AS EXECUTOR OF JAMES FRANCIS DAVID ROBINSON, DECEASED
(respondent)
FILE NO/S:	BS No 4245 of 2016 BS No 4098 of 2018
DIVISION:	Trial Division
PROCEEDING:	Application
ORIGINATING	Supreme Court at Brisbane
COURT:
DELIVERED ON:	6 March 2020
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	7 November 2019
JUDGE:	Davis J
ORDER:	Orders in terms of Schedules 2 and 3 to these reasons.
CATCHWORDS:	EQUITY – TRUSTS AND TRUSTEES – APPLICATIONS TO COURT FOR ADVICE AND AUTHORITY – PETITION OR SUMMONS FOR ADVICE – GENERALLY – where
applications were brought by the administrator of the estate of
the deceased – where administrator seeks the dissolution of
family provision orders, in order to sell a property of the estate
– where administrator seeks to have the applicant’s caveat over
that property removed, in order to sell the property – where
administrator seeks judicial advice and declarations pursuant to s 96(2) of the Trusts Act 1973 before embarking upon settlement with one respondent and action against other parties
– whether the orders should be dissolved and judicial advice
given Succession Act 1981, ss 6, 42 Trusts Act 1973, s 96
Corbiere & Anor v Dulley & Ors [2016] QSC 134, cited
Glassock v Trust Company (Australia) Pty Ltd [2012] QSC 15, cited
Macedonian Orthodox Community Church St Petka Inc v His Eminence Petar Diocesan Bishop of the Macedonian
Orthodox Diocese of Australia and New Zealand (2008) 237 CLR 66, followed
MTM Funds Management Ltd v Cabalane Holdings Pty Ltd
(2000) 158 FLR 121, applied
COUNSEL:	In both BS 4245 of 2016 and BS 4098 of 2018:
G R Dickson for Gail Groundwater J I Otto for the administrator Carla Parsons J H Crowther (solicitor) for the former executor Matthew Karl Robinson A G Rae for Prudence Poole, the Litigation Guardian of the infant beneficiaries, Oliver Robinson, Talia Robinson, Thor Robinson and Rueben Robinson Margaret Robinson appeared in person James Robinson appeared in person[1]
SOLICITORS:	Attwood Marshall for Gail Groundwater Parsons Law for the administrator Carla Parsons Whitehead Crowther Lawyers for the former executor Matthew Karl Robinson McInnes Wilson Lawyers for the Litigation Guardian of the infant beneficiaries Margaret Robinson appeared in person James Robinson appeared in person