Jordan v Goldspring

Jordan v Goldspring involved the Plaintiffs, who sought access to trust documents from the Defendants, who were the trustees of certain trusts. The Plaintiffs were uncertain whether they were beneficiaries or discretionary objects of the trusts, or whether they had an interest in the property subject to the trusts. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The central legal issues revolved around whether the Plaintiffs, as doubtful beneficiaries, were entitled to access the trust documents. Additionally, the court had to determine whether the Defendants' failure to present any evidence on the application warranted drawing any inferences, and whether the Plaintiffs' evidence was sufficient to establish a prima facie case for access to the documents.

The court examined the nature of the Plaintiffs' interest in the trusts and whether their uncertainty about their status as beneficiaries or discretionary objects entitled them to seek access to the trust documents. It was noted that the Defendants did not provide any evidence during the application, which the court considered in light of the Plaintiffs' unrebutted evidence. The court found that the Plaintiffs' evidence was sufficient to establish a prima facie case for access to the trust documents, given their status as doubtful beneficiaries. The court held that the Defendants' failure to present evidence did not warrant drawing any adverse inferences against them. Consequently, the Plaintiffs were entitled to access the trust documents.

The Supreme Court of Queensland ruled in favour of the Plaintiffs, granting them access to the trust documents. This decision was based on the Plaintiffs' status as doubtful beneficiaries and the sufficiency of their evidence to establish a prima facie case for access. The court did not draw any inferences from the Defendants' failure to present evidence on the application. The final orders of the court were that the Plaintiffs were entitled to access the trust documents, subject to any applicable confidentiality provisions.