Laing v Laing

The court was asked to decide who should have custody of the body of James Lindsay Laing, the deceased, for the purpose of burial. The deceased had executed three Wills, but the validity of these Wills and the identity of the executor or personal representative were uncertain. The applicant, Andrew Mark James Laing, one of the deceased’s three children, sought to bury the deceased in a double plot next to the applicant’s mother in Canberra, the Australian Capital Territory. The second respondent, the deceased’s second wife, sought to cremate the deceased in Queensland. The court had to determine whether the body of the deceased should be released to the applicant for the purpose of burying the deceased in Canberra.

The court considered the circumstances of the case and the competing interests of the applicant and the second respondent. The court found that the applicant had a legitimate interest in burying the deceased in Canberra, as it would allow the deceased to be buried next to the applicant’s mother. The court also found that the second respondent’s desire to cremate the deceased in Queensland was not unreasonable, but that it was not as strong as the applicant’s interest in burying the deceased in Canberra. The court noted that the deceased had expressed a desire to be buried in Canberra, and that this was an important factor in the court’s decision.

The court directed that the body of the deceased be released to the applicant for the purpose of a funeral and subsequent burial at Gungahlin Cemetery, Mitchell, the Australian Capital Territory. The court also directed that a grant of representation of the estate of the deceased be made to the Public Trustee of Queensland limited to collecting the deceased’s estate, paying his debts and preserving the estate until further order. The court ordered that the costs of the Public Trustee of Queensland of, and incidental to, this application be assessed and paid out of the deceased’s estate on an indemnity basis.