Christopherson v Wright; Christopherson v Wright [2024] NSWSC 1144

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Christopherson v Wright; Christopherson v Wright [2024] NSWSC 1144 Hearing dates: 16 – 19 July 2024 Date of orders: 9 September 2024 Decision date: 09 September 2024 Jurisdiction: Equity Before: Pike J Decision: (1) Direct the parties to confer and to seek to agree orders to give effect to these reasons, including as to costs. (2) Direct the parties to provide agreed orders, or competing orders, to my Associate by no later than 19 September 2024. (3) In the event that there is no agreement as to orders, direct the parties to provide to my Associate by no later than 19 September 2024, any submissions and supporting material, such submissions not to exceed 5 pages, whereupon the remaining issues will be determined on the papers. Catchwords: EQUITY – estoppel – equitable proprietary estoppel by encouragement – claim by deceased's daughter-in-law – whether alleged representations by the deceased promising interest in family homestead were made after plaintiff loaned money to deceased – finding that representations were not made – even if representations had been made, they lacked the requisite degree of precision – no detriment suffered SUCCESSION – family provision claim – claim by adult children under Succession Act 2006 (NSW) Ch 3 – where partnerships were set up in the family to farm rural properties – where family agreement had been entered into to divide assets following divorce of deceased and former wife SUCCESSION – family provision claim – where provision for adult child in one proceedings not adequate – where adult child had considerably contributed unpaid time and labour to family partnership – where community expectations would mean a just and wise testator in the position of the deceased would have included adult child in testamentary bounty – finding that further provision should be made SUCCESSION – family provision claim – approval of release under family agreement – plaintiff enters into family agreement with deceased and family members whereby deceased promises to transfer assets to plaintiff – deceased's obligations under family agreement were not completely fulfilled and a second agreement was entered into which was also not completely fulfilled – no basis to set aside the release in the family agreement – whether release should be approved under s 95 of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW) – where effluxion of time since family agreement, non-compliance with family agreement, lack of enforcement against other siblings, and disparity of financial position are all factors which weigh against approval being given – approval of release declined Legislation Cited: Succession Act 2006 (NSW) ss 59 and 95 Cases Cited: 400 George Street (Qld) Pty Ltd v BG International Limited [2010] QCA 245 Bell Group Ltd (in liq) v Westpac Banking Corporation [2001] WASC 315 BM Sydney Building Materials Pty Ltd v AWT Building Group (Aust) Pty Ltd [2019] NSWSC 421 BP Refinery (Westernport) Pty Ltd v Shire of Hastings (1977) 180 CLR 266 Bradley v Irvine; Irvine v Irvine [2024] NSWSC 727 Carter v Brine [2015] SASC 204 Delaforce v Simpson-Cook (2010) 78 NSWLR 483 Dighton v Norwood [2024] NSWSC 318 Doueihi v Construction Technologies Australia Pty Ltd (2016) 92 NSWLR 247 Eggins v Robinson [2000] NSWCA 61 Eyota Pty Ltd v Hanave Pty Ltd (1994) 12 ACSR 785 Gestmin SGPS SA v Credit Suisse (UK) Ltd [2013] EWHC 3560 (Comm) Kelly v Kelly [2019] NSWSC 994 Kramer v Stone (2023) 112 NSWLR 564; [2023] NSWCA 270 Last v Lewis [2022] NSWSC 791 Layton v Martin [1986] 2 FLR 227 Limberger v Limberger; Oakman v Limberger [2021] NSWSC 474 Mulcahy v Weldon [2001] NSWSC 474 Nadinic v Drinkwater (2017) 94 NSWLR 518 Q (a pseudonym) v E Co (a pseudonym) [2020] NSWCA 220 Re Chomley [2014] VSC 220 Sidhu v Van Dyke (2014) 251 CLR 505; [2014] HCA 19 Thorner v Major [2009] 1 WLR 776; [2009] UKHL 18 Trentelman v Owners of Strata Plan No 76700 (2021) 106 NSWLR 227 Vadasz v Pioneer Concrete (SA) Pty Ltd (1995) 184 CLR 102 Waltons Stores (Interstate) Ltd v Maher (1988) 164 CLR 387 Watson v Foxman (1995) 49 NSWLR 315 Texts Cited: D O'Sullivan, S Elliott and R Zakrewski, The Law of Recission (3rd Ed, Oxford University Press) Category: Principal judgment Parties: In proceedings 2023/00057431: Shane Christopherson (Plaintiff) Sharon Ann Wright (Defendant)