Worthington bht Worthington v Hallissy [2022] NSWSC 753

Worthington bht Worthington v Hallissy [2022] NSWSC 753

Mrs Jenner's application to withdraw her submitting appearance was refused because it was made during the final hearing after a deliberate forensic choice while legally represented, after long notice that money orders were sought, without a defence or evidence, with non-compliance concerning production of documents, and would have caused unfair ambush or surprise to elderly and unwell plaintiffs. The deed and payment evidence established that Mr Worthington acquired a 50% beneficial interest in the St Ives property and that Mr and Mrs Jenner held the corresponding net sale proceeds on trust for him. Their failure to pay, keep the funds separate, keep proper accounts or respond properly to...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Common Law Proceedings Concerning Trusts, Equitable Compensation, Possession and Rectification of the Real Property Act 1900 (nsw) Register / Principal Judgment After Final Hearing; Settlement With the First Defendant Approved and Consent Orders Made; Plaintiffs Pressed Orders Against the Second and Third Defendants
Outcome
Leave to withdraw Mrs Jenner's submitting appearance was refused; declarations of trust and breach of trust were made; equitable compensation was ordered against the Second and Third Defendants.
Legal Topics
['trusts and Trustees' 'breach of Trust' 'equitable Compensation' 'court Approval of Settlement for Person Under Legal Incapacity' 'withdrawal of Submitting Appearance' 'rectification of Register']
['equity' 'civil Procedure' 'trusts' 'real Property'] ['trusts and Trustees' 'breach of Trust' 'equitable Compensation' 'court Approval of Settlement for Person Under Legal Incapacity' 'withdrawal of Submitting Appearance' 'rectification of Register']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Common Law Proceedings Concerning Trusts, Equitable Compensation, Possession and Rectification of the Real Property Act 1900 (nsw) Register / Principal Judgment After Final Hearing; Settlement With the First Defendant Approved and Consent Orders Made; Plaintiffs Pressed Orders Against the Second and Third Defendants

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the settlement concerning Mrs Worthington, a person under legal incapacity, should be approved under s 76 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW).' 'Whether Mrs Jenner should be granted leave during the final hearing to withdraw her submitting appearance.' 'Whether the Second and Third Defendants held 50% of the proceeds of sale of the St Ives property on trust for the Second Plaintiff.' 'Whether the Second and Third Defendants breached their trustee obligations and should pay equitable compensation.']

Ratio Decidendi

Mrs Jenner's application to withdraw her submitting appearance was refused because it was made during the final hearing after a deliberate forensic choice while legally represented, after long notice that money orders were sought, without a defence or evidence, with non-compliance concerning production of documents, and would have caused unfair ambush or surprise to elderly and unwell plaintiffs. The deed and payment evidence established that Mr Worthington acquired a 50% beneficial interest in the St Ives property and that Mr and Mrs Jenner held the corresponding net sale proceeds on trust for him. Their failure to pay, keep the funds separate, keep proper accounts or respond properly to...

Court Disposition

Leave to withdraw Mrs Jenner's submitting appearance was refused; declarations of trust and breach of trust were made; equitable compensation was ordered against the Second and Third Defendants.

Orders

  • ['Declare that the Second and Third Defendants held 50% of the proceeds of sale of xxxxx, being $1,041,122.24, on trust for the Second Plaintiff.' 'Declare that the Second and Third Defendants are in breach of the trust declared in order 1.' 'Order that the Second and Third Defendants pay $1,041,122.24 as equitable...