Woodward v Woodward [2013] NSWSC 1664

Woodward v Woodward [2013] NSWSC 1664

Although the plaintiff's evidence was sketchy and did not establish a strong prima facie case, it was sufficient to show that the plaintiff, as creator and funder of the trust, may well have standing to complain about its administration, particularly where the trustee had declined to provide the trust instrument. Evidence of threats by the first defendant to remove trust assets from Australia raised serious issues about the suitability of the second defendant, controlled by the first defendant, to remain trustee. Because a short restraint would preserve the status quo and no inconvenience was identified, the balance of convenience favoured granting interlocutory relief on the usual...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Equity Division Proceedings by Summons Concerning the Woodward Family Trust / Interlocutory Application for Injunction/freezing Orders
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction granted.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunctions' 'freezing Orders' 'trust Administration' 'threatened Removal of Trust Assets From Australia' 'balance of Convenience' 'standing']

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

Equity Division Proceedings by Summons Concerning the Woodward Family Trust / Interlocutory Application for Injunction/freezing Orders

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff had shown sufficient standing and a sufficient likelihood of ultimate success to justify interlocutory relief concerning the trust assets.' 'Whether threats to remove trust assets from Australia justified preserving the status quo pending further hearing.' 'Whether delay by the plaintiff and the absence of the trust deed should prevent interlocutory relief.' 'Whether the balance of convenience favoured restraining operation of the trust bank accounts and removal of trust assets from Australia.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the plaintiff's evidence was sketchy and did not establish a strong prima facie case, it was sufficient to show that the plaintiff, as creator and funder of the trust, may well have standing to complain about its administration, particularly where the trustee had declined to provide the trust instrument. Evidence of threats by the first defendant to remove trust assets from Australia raised serious issues about the suitability of the second defendant, controlled by the first defendant, to remain trustee. Because a short restraint would preserve the status quo and no inconvenience was identified, the balance of convenience favoured granting interlocutory relief on the usual...

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction granted.

Orders

  • ['For the period up to and including 3 December 2013, the first and second defendants be restrained, and in the case of the second defendant by itself, its employees or agents, from operating any bank account of the Woodward Family Trust other than by depositing monies into such account.' 'For the period up to and...