Re: Estate of the late Evelyn Mary Dempsey

In the matter of the estate of the late Evelyn Mary Dempsey, the Supreme Court was asked to provide judicial advice in accordance with section 63 of the Trustee Act 1925. The deceased passed away in 1982, leaving significant parts of her estate in intestacy. The court was required to determine whether judicial advice was necessary and, if so, what form that advice should take. Additionally, the court had to resolve the issue of the deceased's domicile at the time of her death, which was in question due to her having lived in New South Wales and later in the United Kingdom. The court was also tasked with examining whether there had been an overpayment to the University of Sydney in the distribution of the estate and if such an overpayment could be rectified by reimbursing the residue of the estate from the University's account.

The court's reasoning focused on the necessity of judicial advice given the complexities of the estate, particularly the intestacy and the domicile issues. Regarding domicile, the court found that the deceased's prolonged stay in the United Kingdom, particularly for psychiatric care, indicated that she was domiciled in the United Kingdom at the time of her death. This finding was crucial in determining the applicable laws governing the estate. In relation to the potential overpayment to the University of Sydney, the court found that there was no evidence of a mistake and that the overpayment could not be rectified by reimbursing from the University's account. Furthermore, the court held that the plaintiff could not distribute the deceased's Australian estate without considering the United Kingdom tax liabilities on the English assets.

The court ruled that judicial advice was indeed required to address the complexities of the estate, including the domicile and the distribution of assets. The court also determined that the plaintiff should not distribute the Australian estate without accounting for the United Kingdom tax liabilities on the English assets. The final orders provided clarity on the administration of the estate, ensuring that all legal and tax obligations were properly addressed.