Suzanne Marie Ryan and Mary Agnes Briggs as executrices of the estate of the late Patrick Joseph Donoghue v Prenitha Srimath Wikramanayake

The executrices of the estate of the late Patrick Joseph Donoghue, Suzanne Marie Ryan and Mary Agnes Briggs, brought an action against Prenitha Srimath Wikramanayake in relation to accommodation bonds paid under a Resident Agreement for occupation of units in an aged care facility. The residents, including Mr Donoghue, occupied units in the facility for approximately seven months before their passing. The executrices sought the return of the accommodation bonds, claiming that the defendants had received the bonds and were liable to restore them. They argued that the bonds were returnable under the Resident Agreement or by other means, and that the Aged Care Act (Cth) had an effect on the agreement. Additionally, the executrices sought to establish a constructive trust over the bonds, alleging that the defendants held them on trust for the plaintiffs and had assisted in a breach of trust or fiduciary duty by the facility lessor.

The legal issues before the court included whether the defendants received the accommodation bonds, whether they were liable to return them, and whether the bonds were returnable under the Resident Agreement or by other means. The court also had to consider the effect of the Aged Care Act (Cth) on the agreement. Furthermore, the executrices argued for the imposition of a constructive trust over the bonds, claiming that the defendants held them on trust for the plaintiffs and had assisted in a breach of trust or fiduciary duty by the facility lessor. The court also considered whether the defendants had engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct by not disclosing that the aged care facility operator might transfer the accommodation bonds to the defendants in response to a demand by a company controlled by the defendants.

The court found that the defendants had received the accommodation bonds and were liable to return them. It held that the bonds were returnable under the Resident Agreement or by other means, and that the Aged Care Act (Cth) did not affect the agreement. The court rejected the claim for a constructive trust, finding that the defendants did not hold the bonds on trust for the plaintiffs and had not assisted in a breach of trust or fiduciary duty by the facility lessor. The court also found that the defendants had not engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct by not disclosing that the aged care facility operator might transfer the accommodation bonds to the defendants in response to a demand by a company controlled by the defendants.

The court ordered the defendants to return the accommodation bonds to the executrices within 28 days. The executrices were also awarded costs of the proceedings.