The Court revoked a grant of letters of administration where the administrator unilaterally redirected rental income into an account under her sole control contrary to a longstanding agreement between all intestacy beneficiaries, refused to transfer estate property into the beneficiaries' names as agreed, failed to account for estate funds, and used estate money to pay her personal legal costs in defending the revocation proceedings. The Court held that intestacy beneficiaries and their administrator are free to agree on methods of administration departing from the statutory scheme under the Intestacy Act 2010 (Tas), and that such agreements may be enforceable, following Bailey v Bailey [2004] NSWSC 448. A replacement administrator (one of the beneficiary plaintiffs) was appointed, with the Court finding that hostility between siblings did not disqualify him where the remaining administrative tasks were limited and could be supervised by the Court.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.