ByLawyers News and Updates
  • Publication updates
    • Federal
    • New South Wales
    • Victoria
    • Queensland
    • South Australia
    • Western Australia
    • Northern Territory
    • Tasmania
    • Australian Capital Territory
  • By area of law
    • Bankruptcy and Liquidation
    • Business and Franchise
    • Companies, Trusts, Partnerships and Superannuation
    • Conveyancing and Property
    • Criminal Law
    • Defamation and Protecting Reputation
    • Employment Law
    • Family Law
    • Immigration
    • Litigation
    • Neighbourhood Disputes
    • Personal injury
    • Personal Property Securities
    • Practice Management
    • Security of Payments
    • Trade Marks
    • Wills and Estates
  • Legal alerts
  • Articles
  • By Lawyers

Estates cases – VIC

4 December 2020 by By Lawyers

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.

Filed Under: Publication Updates, Victoria, Wills and Estates Tagged With: beneficiaries, estates, executor, trustee, Wills

Estate cases – QLD

4 December 2020 by By Lawyers

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.

Filed Under: Publication Updates, Queensland, Wills and Estates Tagged With: beneficiaries, estates, executor, trustee, Wills

Estates cases – NSW

4 December 2020 by By Lawyers

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.

Filed Under: New South Wales, Publication Updates, Wills and Estates Tagged With: assets, beneficiaries, estates, executor, letters of administration, probate, trustee, Wills

Wills – resignation of trustee

1 September 2017 by By Lawyers

A provision has been included in the will precedents to provide for the resignation of a trustee without being replaced, provided one remains.

Filed Under: Australian Capital Territory, Legal Alerts, New South Wales, Northern Territory, Publication Updates, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria, Western Australia, Wills and Estates Tagged With: resignation, trustee, Wills

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required
Preferred State

Connect with us

  • Email
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

Copyright © 2025 · Privacy Policy
Created and hosted by LEAP · Log in