Re Hartley

The matter of Re Hartley came before the court where the applicant sought the revocation of a grant of probate issued to the respondent. The applicant contended that the respondent had failed to administer the estate and had not advanced a family provision application that the applicant had initiated in the District Court. The applicant was also the applicant in the District Court family provision application and, apart from this proceeding, was not a beneficiary under the deceased’s will. The central issue for the court to determine was whether the applicant had the standing to seek the revocation of the grant of probate when they merely held a possible future interest in the estate contingent on the success of their family provision application.

The court considered the legal principles governing the revocation of a grant of probate and the standing of applicants to seek such revocation. It was established that an applicant must have a sufficient interest in the estate to challenge the administration and seek revocation. The court examined the applicant’s current interest in the estate and found that, apart from the potential future interest contingent on the outcome of the family provision application, the applicant did not possess a present interest that would ordinarily confer standing. The court held that the applicant's lack of a current interest in the estate was a significant impediment to establishing standing in this context.

Consequently, the court decided to adjourn the application for further hearing to allow the parties to address the issue of standing more fully. The court reserved its decision on costs, indicating that it would be determined at the conclusion of the further hearing. This adjournment provided the opportunity for the applicant to demonstrate a present interest in the estate, thereby potentially establishing the necessary standing to proceed with the revocation application.