Tyrell v Nankervis; Hodgson v Nankervis

[2008] NSWSC 378

CITATION:	Tyrell v Nankervis; Hodgson v Nankervis [2008] NSWSC 378
HEARING DATE(S):	22 April 2008
JUDGMENT OF:	Gzell J
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE:	22 April 2008
DECISION:	Application dismissed.
CATCHWORDS:	PROCEDURE - Mediation - Application for order for fresh valuations of properties before mediation - Probate valuation of properties at $3m and $2.5m taken in October 2006 and February 2007
LEGISLATION CITED:	Family Provision Act 1982
PARTIES:	Delree Jane Tyrell (Plaintiff in SC 5082/07) Shelley Anne Hodgson (Plaintiff in SC 5083/07) Ian Arthur Nankervis (1st Defendant) Graham Edward Costello (2nd Defendanr)
FILE NUMBER(S):	SC 5082/07; 5083/07
COUNSEL:	G R Waugh (Defendants)
SOLICITORS:	Harris & Company Solicitors (Plaintiffs)

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
EQUITY DIVISION

GZELL J

TUESDAY 22 APRIL 2008

5082/07 DELREE JANE TYRELL v IAN ARTHUR NANKERVIS
5083/07 SHELLY ANNE HODGSON v IAN ARTHUR NANKERVIS

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT

1 Before the court are two related matters seeking provision under the Family Provision Act 1982. The question for resolution is whether there should be further valuations of two substantial rural properties before mediation takes place.

2 The properties were valued for probate purposes. One was valued in October 2006, the other in February 2007. One was valued at $3 M, the other at $2.5 M.

3 In favour of the application it is argued that the parties should be fully informed of the value of the estate before they enter upon mediation.

4 The submission to the contrary is that other valuations have been taken in the past, the present valuations are sufficient for the parties to appreciate the size of the estate with sufficient precision for the purpose of the mediation and the expense of taking further valuations is unwarranted.

5 I tend to agree with the latter submission. It does not seem to me that there will be much difference between valuations taken now and the valuations taken out for probate purposes. What is significant and already established by the probate valuations is that the properties are substantial and their values are substantial. It seems to me that mediation can usefully take place on the basis of the probate valuations.

6 I therefore reject the application.

**********