Local Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Squire v Beech [2018] NSWLC 17 Hearing dates: 31 October 2018 Date of orders: 22 November 2018 Decision date: 22 November 2018 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Magistrate Huntsman Decision: Verdict for the cross-defendant on the cross-claim.
The Statement of Claim is discontinued.Catchwords: RESTITUTION - Funeral expenses - claim for travel costs for transport of deceased ashes - executor’s legal rights and obligations - executor’s duties to the deceased body and funeral arrangements - dispute between former wife and adult daughter Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 s 56 Cases Cited: Abraham v Magistrate Stone, Deputy State Coroner [2017] NSWSC 1684
Smith v Tamworth City Council 41 NSWLR 680
Beech v Squire [2018] NSWSC 594
Darcy v Duckett [2016] NSWSC 1756
Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Haxton; Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Bassat; Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Cunningham's Warehouse Sales Pty Ltd (2012) 246 CLR 498; [2012] HCA 7
Escott v Brikha [2000] NSWSC 458
Smith v Tamworth City Council (1997) 41 NSWLR 680
Union Bank of Australia v Harrison, Jones & Devlin Ltd (1910) CLR 492; [1910] HCA 44Category: Principal judgment Parties: Claire Beech (Cross-claimant/ Defendant)
Corrine Ann Squire (Cross- defendant/ Plaintiff)Representation: Counsel :
Solicitors:
Mr A.G.Martin , for the Cross-claimant/Defendant
Mr P.R Glissan, for the Cross-defendant/Plaintiff
Branston Neville Lawyers, for the Cross-claimant/Defendant
Roderick Storie, Solicitors, for the Cross-defendant/Plaintiff
File Number(s): 2016/00255779 Publication restriction: Nil
Judgment
Background
-
This is a claim for payment of money said to be owed by the executor of the estate to the daughter of the deceased. The executor is the deceased’s former wife. The daughter transported the deceased ashes to Wales, some months after the funeral, and in the Cross Claimed filed, seeks reimbursement for associated costs of so doing, from the executor of her father’s estate.
-
Ms Squire is the former wife of the deceased, Richard Squire, who died between 29 and 30 April 2015. Ms Squire is the sole executrix and beneficiary of the Will dated 21 March 2007, of her late husband, Richard Squire. On 25 May 2016 the Supreme Court of New South Wales granted Probate of the Will to Ms Squire. At the time of Richard Squire’s death, he had very recently separated from Ms Squire and was residing with his daughter, Ms Beech. Upon his death there was a dispute, between the daughter and the former wife, as to release of the body from the Morgue. Ultimately Ms Squire did not persist in her request that the body be released to her, and the deceased’s body was released to the daughter, Ms Beech, to make funeral arrangements. The funeral was held in Bathurst, New South Wales, and the deceased’s remains were cremated.
-
Some months after the funeral the daughter, Ms Beech, decided to take her father’s ashes to Wales in the United Kingdom. The evidence indicates that Ms Beech’s immediate family members (two children, her husband and an infant) travelled by aeroplane to the United Kingdom, incurring the cost…
Continue reading Squire v Beech
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Squire v Beech [2018] NSWLC 17
- Case
- [2018] NSWLC 17
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues revolved around the executor's rights and obligations concerning the deceased's body and funeral arrangements. The court needed to determine whether the executor's decision to incur travel costs for the ashes was justified and whether the former wife had a legitimate claim to reimbursement. Additionally, the court examined the scope of the executor's duties and whether they extended to covering such expenses.
In delivering the judgment, the court found in favour of the defendant, dismissing the cross-claim brought by the former wife. The reasoning hinged on the interpretation of the executor's duties and the specific circumstances of the case. The court concluded that the executor had not acted outside her legal rights and obligations in incurring the travel costs. Consequently, the former wife's claim for reimbursement was not upheld, and the Statement of Claim was discontinued.
Orders
Orders of the court
Verdict for the cross-defendant on the cross-claim.
The Statement of Claim is discontinued.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.