Kendell v Sweeney

Kendell and another sought to be appointed as executors of the estate of the deceased, contesting the appointment of Sweeney and another. The dispute centred on the validity of Sweeney's appointment and whether the trustees were validly appointed in accordance with the trust deed. The applicants also contested the trustees' power to release and discharge the shareholders' loan accounts, arguing that these accounts were "shams". The applicants sought to have the trustees' actions declared invalid and to compel them to account for the estate's assets.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the trustees were validly appointed and whether the trustees had the power to release and discharge the shareholders' loan accounts. Additionally, the court had to interpret the settlement deed to determine if the term "good faith" could be implied into it, requiring the parties to act reasonably. The applicants argued that the trustees' actions were not in good faith and that the loan accounts were not legitimate.

The court held that the trustees were validly appointed and that the power to release and discharge the shareholders' loan accounts was within their authority. The court also found that the term "good faith" could not be implied into the settlement deed, as it was not necessary to give business efficacy to the deed. The applicants' argument that the loan accounts were "shams" was rejected, as there was insufficient evidence to support this claim. Consequently, the court dismissed the application and upheld the trustees' actions.