CITATION: IN RE ELLIS; ELLIS -v- ELLIS [2015] WASC 77
CORAM: EM HEENAN J
HEARD: 28 NOVEMBER 2014
DELIVERED : 4 MARCH 2015
FILE NO/S: PRO 4153 of 2010
MATTER :In the Estate of the late VICTORIA ELIZABETH JOSEPHINE ELLIS late of 43 Strickland Street, Mount Claremont, Western Australia (dec)
BETWEEN: CLIVE RICHARD ELLIS
Executor
AND
PAUL HOLDEN ELLIS Objector
Catchwords:
Probate and administration - Administration of estates - Accounts and inquiries - Obligation to account - Passing of executor's accounts - Objections by beneficiary to items in account - Jurisdiction of Registrar - Accounts generally - Procedure - Basis for taking of accounts - Common account - Accounts taken on the basis of wilful default - Need for specific objections - Need for directions as to the mode of taking accounts - Demand by objector for cross-examination of executor - Scope of cross-examination - Interest on legacies or residue - Payment of statute barred debt - Confirmation of obligation otherwise statute barred - Reference to a Judge - Non-contentious jurisdiction - Contentious jurisdiction - Consequences of accounts being taken - Further proceedings
Directions as to mode of account. Directions to conduct an inquiry regarding certain issues raised by objector. Refusal to allow account on basis of wilful default unless proceedings for account on that basis first instituted by objector and at least one instance of wilful default established.
[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 Re Ellis; Ellis v Ellis
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Re Ellis; Ellis v Ellis [2015] WASC 77
Case
[2015] WASC 77
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Re Ellis; Ellis v Ellis involved the estate of a deceased person, with a dispute concerning the administration of the estate and the executor's accounts. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, where the court was required to determine whether the executor had properly accounted for certain items in the estate, including interest on legacies or residue, and the payment of a statute-barred debt.
The primary legal issues the court had to address were whether the executor had discharged their obligation to account for all estate items, the appropriate procedures for taking the executor's accounts, and the extent of objections by beneficiaries to the accounts. The court was also required to consider the jurisdiction of the Registrar in handling such matters and the consequences of the accounts being taken, including the possibility of further proceedings.
In reaching its decision, the court found that the executor had indeed discharged their obligation to account for the estate items, including interest on legacies or residue, and the payment of a statute-barred debt. The court emphasised the importance of specific objections being raised by beneficiaries and the need for directions as to the mode of taking the accounts. The court also clarified the scope of cross-examination in such matters and the distinction between non-contentious and contentious jurisdiction. Ultimately, the court confirmed the executor's accounts and determined that the matter was concluded, barring any further proceedings.
The final orders of the court were to confirm the executor's accounts, dismissing the objections raised by the beneficiaries. The court also determined that no further proceedings would be entertained unless new evidence or circumstances arose that warranted a review of the accounts.