Millard v Stone [2024] JRC 295 (30 December 2024)

Millard v Stone [2024] JRC 295 (30 December 2024)

Specific discovery is only ordered where plaintiff establishes existence and relevance of undisclosed documents necessary for just disposal. Plaintiff's complaints about avances and rapport are not relevant to claims she can properly bring; such matters are for the executor. Only complaints relating to documents held by third parties (complaints 21, 33, 34) are granted against the executor. Plaintiff must provide further particulars of undue influence and coercion as requested by Third Defendant. Requests for benefits list and other discovery are refused.

Citation
[2024] JRC 295
Parties
Plaintiff: Dawn Millard; First Defendant: Annette Stone; Second Defendant: Tim Stone; Third Defendant: Marcus Stone; Executor: Advocate Blakeley
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
30 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Judgment on Discovery and Further Information Summonses
Outcome
Plaintiff's summons for specific discovery largely dismissed; granted only as against executor for documents held by third parties. Plaintiff's request for list of benefits refused. Third Defendant's request for further information granted in part.
Legal Topics
Discovery, Undue Influence, Will Validity, Executor Duties, Rapport a La Masse, Avances De Succession, Further Information Requests
Probate Civil Procedure Discovery Undue Influence Will Validity Executor Duties Rapport a La Masse Avances De Succession +1 more

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dawn Millard

Plaintiff

Annette Stone

First Defendant

Tim Stone

Second Defendant

Marcus Stone

Third Defendant

Advocate Blakeley

Executor

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Judgment on Discovery and Further Information Summonses

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether specific discovery should be ordered against defendants and executor
  2. 2 Whether plaintiff is entitled to a list of benefits received from the deceased
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff must provide further particulars of undue influence and coercion

Ratio Decidendi

Specific discovery is only ordered where plaintiff establishes existence and relevance of undisclosed documents necessary for just disposal. Plaintiff's complaints about avances and rapport are not relevant to claims she can properly bring; such matters are for the executor. Only complaints relating to documents held by third parties (complaints 21, 33, 34) are granted against the executor. Plaintiff must provide further particulars of undue influence and coercion as requested by Third Defendant. Requests for benefits list and other discovery are refused.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's summons for specific discovery largely dismissed; granted only as against executor for documents held by third parties. Plaintiff's request for list of benefits refused. Third Defendant's request for further information granted in part.

Orders

  • Plaintiff to provide responses to Third Defendant's Requests for Further Information (paragraphs 23L and 25B) by 17 January 2025.
  • Executor to give specific discovery of documents referred to in complaints 21, 33, and 34 by 31 January 2025.