Holmes v Permanent Trustee Company of New South Wales Limited [1932] HCA 1

Cons ~~

Barns v Barns

Refdto ae Tracy v G3) Hepartenion

on aR SB od eat CLR leo LD 403 47 CLR.)

OF AUSTRALIA.

(HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA]

HOLMES AND ANOTHER

AND

APPLICANTS ;

PERMANENT TRUSTEE COMPANY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LIMITED AND OTHERS

RESPONDENTS.

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY.

Will—Probate granted in New South Wales—Resealing in North Australia—As yy ©, or A. effective as if original grant—Testator's Family Maintenance Ordinance 1929 (W.7.) (No, 21 of 1929),"sees, 4*, 5*—Northern Territory Acceptance Act 1910- 1919 (No. 20 of 1910—No. 24 of 1919), sec. 7—Northern Australia Act 1926 (No. 16 of 1926), sec. 38—Administration and Probate Act 1891 (S.A.) (No. 587), Dec. 17,1931;

secs, 26, 29,

On 23rd August 1929 probate of a testator's will was granted by the Supreme Court of New South Wales, and an exemplification of such probate was resealed in North Australia on 10th June 1930, An application which was made on 18th November 1930, and at a later date renewed pursuant to leave reserved, under the Testator's Family Maintenance Ordinance 1929 (N.T.) by the testator's widow and child was dismissed by the Supreme Court of North Australia for

want of jurisdiction.

On appeal to the High Court,

Held, that by virtue of sec. 26 of the Administration and Probate Act 1891 (S.A.), which continued to be in force in North Australia, the resealing of the

* The Testator's Family Maintenance Ordinance 1929 (N.T.) provides :— "4. (1) Tf any person (in this ordin- ance called 'the testator') disposes of or has disposed of his property by will in such a manner that the wife . or children of the testator, or any of them, are left without proper main- tenance, education or advancement in life, the Court may, at its dis- cretion, on application by or cn behalf of the wife or children, or