The Court held that a disputed and contingent right to elect to acquire property under s 115 of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW) does not constitute a quasi-proprietary interest in land sufficient to resist a s 66G order for appointment of trustees for sale. The Court also held that the late filing of Succession Act proceedings, without evidence of their prospects of success or the applicant's capacity to acquire the property, was insufficient to justify declining to make s 66G orders on the basis that such orders would undercut a statutory remedy. A general assertion of breach of fiduciary duty by an estate administrator who has appropriately sought court orders and undertaken to hold proceeds pending related claims was rejected as a ground for refusing the orders.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.