ByLawyers News and Updates

Estates cases – VIC

by

New estate cases have been added to the By Lawyers 101 Succession Answers (VIC) reference manual.

The new cases under the Estates section of the publication relate to:

Vesting of interest in beneficiaries – Rule in Saunders v Vautier

A beneficiary can apply to the court to have their interest vest earlier than provided for in the will. The rule in Saunders v Vautier possibly provides such a mechanism.

The High Court set out the modern formulation of the rule in Saunders v Vautier in CPT Custodian Pty Ltd v Commissioner of State Revenue [2005] HCA 53 at [47]:

Under the rule in Saunders v Vautier, an adult beneficiary (or a number of adult beneficiaries acting together) who has (or between them have) an absolute, vested and indefeasible interest in the capital and income of property may at any time require the transfer of the property to him (or them) and may terminate any accumulation.

If the beneficiaries are ascertained, have capacity and all consent then ‘they may put an end to the trust by directing the trustee to transfer the interest in the estate to themselves, notwithstanding any direction to the contrary in the trust instrument’: Krstic v State Trustees Ltd [2012] VSC 344 at [15].

For a case where the rule was not upheld due to the beneficial interest being classed as contingent, see Arnott v Kiss [2014] NSWSC 1385. This case also suggests that a gift over clause may defeat application of the rule.

Accordingly, whether there is any reason for the executor to resist the application would depend upon there being any terms of the will that might support such a position. If the executor is in any doubt then the trustee can and should seek judicial advice.

The addition of these new estate cases to 101 Succession Answers (VIC) is part of our continuing commitment to enhancing our content and helping our subscribers enjoy practice more.

Estate cases – QLD

by

New estate cases have been added to the By Lawyers 101 Succession Answers (QLD) reference manual.

The new cases under the Estates section of the publication relate to:

Vesting of interest in beneficiaries – Rule in Saunders v Vautier

A beneficiary can apply to the court to have their interest vest earlier than provided for in the will. The rule in Saunders v Vautier possibly provides such a mechanism.

The High Court set out the modern formulation of the rule in Saunders v Vautier in CPT Custodian Pty Ltd v Commissioner of State Revenue [2005] HCA 53 at [47]:

Under the rule in Saunders v Vautier, an adult beneficiary (or a number of adult beneficiaries acting together) who has (or between them have) an absolute, vested and indefeasible interest in the capital and income of property may at any time require the transfer of the property to him (or them) and may terminate any accumulation.

In Re Tracey [2016] QCA 194 the Court of Appeal at [10] stated that:

The context of that reference makes it clear that the rule may be invoked only by a beneficiary who is sui juris. The expression sui juris connotes in law “a person who can validly contract and bind himself by legal obligation uncontrolled by another person”.

For a case where the rule was not upheld due to the beneficial interest being classed as contingent, see Arnott v Kiss [2014] NSWSC 1385. This case also suggests that a gift over clause may defeat application of the rule.

Accordingly, whether there is any reason for the executor to resist the application would depend upon there being any terms of the will that might support such a position. If the executor is in any doubt then the trustee can and should seek judicial advice.

The addition of these new estate cases to 101 Succession Answers (QLD) is part of our continuing commitment to enhancing our content and helping our subscribers enjoy practice more.

Estates cases – NSW

by

New estates cases have been added to By Lawyers 101 Succession Answers (NSW) reference manual.

The new cases under the Estates section of the publication relate to:

Additional assets after grant

The administrator’s obligation to disclose is a continuous one. Any assets not disclosed in the initial affidavit must be disclosed to the court by way of further affidavit: r 78.91 Supreme Court Rules 1970. If an asset has come to light after the grant has been finalised, an Affidavit of Additional Assets needs to be filed.

If an updated copy of the grant is required, an Application for Exemplification also needs to be filed. An exemplification is a certified and sealed copy of a grant. The Inventory of Property does not need to be amended.

The Affidavit of Additional Assets and the Application for Exemplification are available in the By Lawyers Estates guide, on the Probate and Letters of Administration matter plans.

Vesting of interest in beneficiaries

A beneficiary can apply to the court to have their interest vest earlier than provided for in the will under the rule in Saunders v Vautier.

The High Court set out the modern formulation of the rule in Saunders v Vautier in CPT Custodian Pty Ltd v Commissioner of State Revenue [2005] HCA 53 at [47]:

Under the rule in Saunders v Vautier, an adult beneficiary (or a number of adult beneficiaries acting together) who has (or between them have) an absolute, vested and indefeasible interest in the capital and income of property may at any time require the transfer of the property to him (or them) and may terminate any accumulation.

In Beck v Henley [2014] NSWCA 201 the Court of appeal at [35] stated that:

Adult beneficiaries who are absolutely and indefeasibly entitled have power to “overbear and defeat the intention of a testator or settlor to subject property to the continuing trusts, powers and limitations of a will or trust instrument”.

A case where the rule was not upheld has been added –  Arnott v Kiss [2014] NSWSC 1385.

The addition of these new estates cases to 101 Succession Answers (NSW) is part of By Lawyers continuing commitment to enhancing our content and helping our subscribers enjoy practice more.

TAS – Estates – Guidance Note – Itemised bills and beneficiaries

by

In July 2018 the Legal Profession Board of Tasmania identified an issue with an increasing number of complaints against legal practitioners relating to perceived overcharging and failure to communicate with executors/administrators and beneficiaries regarding costs for estate matters.

As a result, the Legal Profession Board issued a detailed Guidance Note for the profession outlining what it considers to be appropriate standards of conduct, aimed at minimising complaints.

The Guidance Note says that, while there is no legislative requirement to provide beneficiaries with itemised bills, it ‘may be advisable’ to do so. This particularly applies where practitioners are also the executor or administrator of the estate and especially if they are seeking commission or proposing to charge in any way not provided for in the will.

The By Lawyers Probate and Letters of Administration commentaries have been updated accordingly.

Connect with us