Da Silva v Heselton & Ors

Da Silva v Heselton & Ors

The fourth defendant was substituted as personal representative in place of the first and second defendants as of 17 June 2016; upon full administration, the fourth defendant is trustee of the residuary estate, not the first defendant. The first defendant is not entitled to indemnity for liabilities incurred after substitution. The question of vesting of Dominica property cannot be determined without further legal argument on Dominica law.

Parties
Claimant: Jacqueline Da Silva; First Defendant: Sandra Heselton; Second Defendant: Ronald Armour; Third Defendant: Jacqueline Boland; Fourth Defendant: Peter Brunton; Fifth Defendant: Rita Boland
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Probate/trusts / Judgment on Applications for Construction of Consent Order, Joinder of Parties, and Indemnity Claim
Outcome
Applications determined; fourth defendant confirmed as personal representative and trustee of residuary estate; first defendant not entitled to indemnity; joinder of fourth and fifth defendants ordered.
Legal Topics
Construction of Will, Substitution of Personal Representative, Trustee Removal, Indemnity of Former Trustee, Vesting of Property
Probate Trusts Property Construction of Will Substitution of Personal Representative Trustee Removal Indemnity of Former Trustee Vesting of Property

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacqueline Da Silva

Claimant

Sandra Heselton

First Defendant

Ronald Armour

Second Defendant

Jacqueline Boland

Third Defendant

Peter Brunton

Fourth Defendant

Rita Boland

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Probate/trusts / Judgment on Applications for Construction of Consent Order, Joinder of Parties, and Indemnity Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether first defendant remains trustee of residuary estate under the Will after consent order
  2. 2 Whether property at 30 Rose Street, Dominica vested in first defendant as at September 2017
  3. 3 Whether first defendant is entitled to indemnity from estate for liabilities incurred as trustee

Ratio Decidendi

The fourth defendant was substituted as personal representative in place of the first and second defendants as of 17 June 2016; upon full administration, the fourth defendant is trustee of the residuary estate, not the first defendant. The first defendant is not entitled to indemnity for liabilities incurred after substitution. The question of vesting of Dominica property cannot be determined without further legal argument on Dominica law.

Court Disposition

Applications determined; fourth defendant confirmed as personal representative and trustee of residuary estate; first defendant not entitled to indemnity; joinder of fourth and fifth defendants ordered.

Orders

  • Peter Brunton joined as fourth defendant.
  • Rita Boland joined as fifth defendant.