The Court refused an interlocutory injunction to restrain the executor from selling estate property, holding that the applicant's family provision summons failed to specify the life interest or Crisp order actually sought, following Theocharous v Theocharous, and that this deficiency meant no serious question to be tried was established in the Succession Act proceedings. While a weak serious question existed in the possession proceedings based on an uncorroborated oral promise by the deceased, the balance of convenience weighed against relief due to substantial unexplained delay in seeking the injunction, prejudice to third-party purchasers who had incurred significant planning expenses, and the applicant's failure to seek undertakings or injunctive relief promptly after learning of the intended sale.
The full text is available to signed-in members.