Mendonca v Tonna; Mendonca v Hathway

The case of Mendonca v Tonna and Mendonca v Hathway involved a dispute concerning the remuneration of trustees under a trust established for the benefit of certain beneficiaries. The proceedings took place in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The central issue was whether the court's previous order that trustees could charge their usual hourly professional rates, subject to a total sum not exceeding $20,000, imposed an absolute cap on their remuneration or if the court could still authorise an increase beyond this amount.

The court had to determine whether the earlier order imposed a binding and invariable limit on the trustees' remuneration or if it was subject to the court's discretion to authorise an increase. The court considered the language of the order, the duties of the trustees to act justly, fairly, and reasonably, and the principles governing the remuneration of trustees. The court concluded that the order did not impose an absolute cap on the trustees' remuneration but rather provided a guideline subject to the court's discretion.

The court found that the trustees had an onus to demonstrate that any increase in their remuneration was just, fair, and reasonable. The court emphasised the trustees' duties to act in the best interests of the beneficiaries and to provide transparency and accountability in their remuneration claims. The court ordered that the question of whether the trustees' claimed remuneration was just, fair, and reasonable be separately determined. This decision provided clarity on the court's ability to authorise an increase in trustee remuneration and the trustees' obligations to discharge the onus of proving the reasonableness of their claims.