Re Estate Lygdas - [2025] NSWSC 1290

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Re Estate Lygdas [2025] NSWSC 1290
Hearing dates: 8, 20 and 29 August 2025, with written submissions
Decision date: 03 November 2025
Jurisdiction: Equity - Probate List
Before: Lindsay J
Decision:
Subject to allowing the parties an opportunity to make submissions about the form of orders, costs and directions for further conduct of the proceedings:
1.   Orders for probate of the will of a deceased person to be granted to the defendant forthwith notwithstanding that the plaintiff seeks to maintain a claim that the principal asset of the estate is held on trust for her in whole or part.
2.   Interlocutory orders for management of the estate’s principal asset and consideration of the plaintiff’s leave to amend her statement of claim.
3.   Costs orders arising from the plaintiff’s abandonment of several claims for relief and admission of the deceased’s will to probate.

Catchwords:
PROBATE – Practice and procedure – Uncontested application for probate – Consideration of application not deferred pending determination of claim that estate property held on trust outside the will
SUCCESSION – Costs – Consequences of abandonment of several claims for relief including, but not limited to abandonment of opposition to grant of probate

Legislation Cited:
Succession Act 2006 NSW
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2025

Cases Cited:
Estate of Kouvakas; Lucas v Konakas [2014] NSWSC 786
Re Estate of Hodges; Shorter v Hodges (1988) 14 NSWLR 698

Category: Procedural rulings
Parties: Plaintiff: Areti Lygdas
Defendant: Geoffrey Dennis Walker
Representation:
Counsel:
Plaintiff: Daniel Yazdani
Defendant: Angela Djukanovic
Solicitors:
Plaintiff: Calabrese Lawyers
Defendant: Higgins Lawyers

File Number(s): 2023/00421297

JUDGMENT

INTRODUCTION

These proceedings concern the estate of Daphne Lygdas (“the deceased”) who died by suicide on 26 March 2023, leaving a will dated 27 May 2021 which named the defendant (who claims to have been the deceased’s long-term partner) as sole executor and beneficiary.
The main asset of the estate is a residential property comprising a strata unit in Lakemba.
There is a history of acrimony between the plaintiff (the mother of the deceased) and the defendant.
The validity of the deceased’s will was in issue at the time of commencement of these proceedings, but is no longer disputed by the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s abandonment of substantially the whole of the case for which she contended at the commencement of the proceedings, and her progressive assertion of a new case over successive amendments of her statement of claim, necessitates a review of the course of the proceedings to date, and a reassessment of how best to proceed.
When she commenced the proceedings the plaintiff claimed that the deceased died intestate; denied that the defendant was in a domestic relationship which would entitle him to inherit the deceased’s estate on intestacy; and claimed that, on an intestacy, she was entitled to the whole of the deceased’s estate under Chapter 4 of the Succession Act 2006 NSW or, alternatively, the benefit of a family provision order under Chapter 3 of the Succession Act 2006. Each…

Grounds of appeal

[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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Re Estate Lygdas and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2025] NSWSC 1290
Decision Date: 03 November 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Re Estate Lygdas, the applicant sought an uncontested grant of probate for a will in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The estate's executors sought the grant to manage the deceased's assets and distribute them according to the terms of the will. The deceased had left a will that named specific beneficiaries. However, the application was opposed by several potential beneficiaries who claimed that certain property of the estate was held on trust outside the will and sought to have these claims determined before the grant of probate. The court had to consider whether the application for probate could proceed without first resolving these claims.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the grant of probate could be issued in the face of unresolved claims regarding the property of the estate. Specifically, the court needed to determine whether the court's consideration of the application for probate should be deferred pending the resolution of these claims. The court was also required to address the consequences of the abandonment of these claims by the potential beneficiaries on the costs associated with the proceedings.

The court found that the application for probate could proceed without being deferred pending the determination of the claims regarding the estate property. The court held that the claims made by the potential beneficiaries were collateral to the main issue of granting probate and did not necessitate a deferral of the grant of probate. The court reasoned that the claims regarding the property of the estate could be pursued separately through other legal mechanisms. Furthermore, the court ruled that the abandonment of the claims by the potential beneficiaries resulted in the costs associated with those claims being awarded against them. The court considered the abandonment of these claims to be a significant factor in determining the costs.

The court granted the application for probate, allowing the executors to administer the estate as per the will. The court also ruled that the potential beneficiaries who had abandoned their claims would be liable for the costs associated with those claims, reflecting the court's view that the abandonment of the claims was a deliberate decision by the parties involved.

Orders