Ritossa v Ritossa

The appeal concerned an application for leave to appeal an interlocutory decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales regarding the appointment of an interim administrator of the estate of the late Mr. Ritossa. The underlying proceedings involved a dispute between the parties, who were seeking to propound different wills of the deceased, and a contentious disagreement regarding the management of the estate pending the resolution of those proceedings.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the primary judge had properly exercised their discretion under section 73 of the *Probate and Administration Act 1898* (NSW) in appointing an interim administrator. This required the Court to consider whether it was a necessary prerequisite to finding that the estate assets were "in jeopardy" before such an appointment could be made, particularly in circumstances of a toxic relationship between the parties and a dispute over estate management.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the principles governing appeals from interlocutory decisions, noting that leave to appeal is not granted as of right. It was held that the primary judge's decision to appoint an interim administrator was a proper exercise of discretion, given the acrimonious dispute between the parties and the need for independent management of the estate to preserve its assets and ensure orderly administration pending the determination of the contested wills. The Court found that the "jeopardy" of assets was not a strict requirement for the exercise of the discretion, but rather the overall circumstances, including the breakdown in communication and the potential for mismanagement, justified the appointment.

Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed, and the respondents were awarded their costs.