Squire v Beech

Case [2018] NSWLC 17


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 44
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Claire Beech (Cross-claimant/ Defendant)
Corrine Ann Squire (Cross- defendant/ Plaintiff)
Representation:

Counsel :
Mr A.G.Martin , for the Cross-claimant/Defendant
Mr P.R Glissan, for the Cross-defendant/Plaintiff

    Solicitors:
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

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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

Details
AGLC
Squire v Beech [2018] NSWLC 17
Case
[2018] NSWLC 17
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Squire v Beech involved a dispute over funeral expenses, specifically a claim for travel costs incurred in the transport of the deceased's ashes. The plaintiff, who was the former wife and cross-claimant, and the defendant, who was the adult daughter and executor of the deceased's estate, were in conflict regarding the handling of the deceased's remains and related expenses. The case was heard in the relevant court, which delivered its judgment on the matter.

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.