NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Ackerley v Felton [2012] NSWSC 1468 Hearing dates: 1 November 2012 Decision date: 04 December 2012 Before: Young AJ Decision: 1. Declare that the document commencing "My will Kevin J Ackerley" dated 4 June 2007 is entitled to be admitted to probate. 2. Order that the court assigns the plaintiff as guardian of Corey Gates to take the grant of administration during the minority of Corey Gates for the latter's use and benefit. 3. Refer to the Registrar to complete the issue of letters of Administration cum testamento annexo durante minore aetate to the plaintiff limited until Corey Gates attains 18 years of age. 4. Refer to the Registrar as to whether the grant under s 41A of the Probate and Administration Act 1898 ought to be recalled. 5. Reserve questions of costs with the intent that the judge hearing the pending applications under the Family Provision Act 1982 in the estate of Kevin James Ackerley may deal with such costs when making orders in those proceedings. Catchwords: WILLS, PROBATE AND ADMINISTRATION - informal will - whether the document constitutes a will of the deceased person - whether the document embodies the deceased's real testamentary intentions - whether the deceased was of sound mind, memory and understanding at the time he executed the document- appointment of guardian for grant of will Legislation Cited: Family Provision Act 1982 Probate and Administration Act 1898 Succession Act 2005 Supreme Court Rules 1970 Cases Cited: Bailey v Bailey [1924] HCA 21; (1923) 34 CLR 558 Boughton v Knight (1873) LR 3 P & D 64 Bull v Fulton [1942] HCA 13; (1942) 66 CLR 295 Dew v Clark (1826) 3 Add 79; 162 ER 410 Du Maurier v Wechsler [2001] NSWSC 34 Easter v Griffith (1995) 217 ALR 284 Estate of Hodges (1988) 14 NSWLR 698 King v Hudson [2009] NSWSC 1013 Nichols v Nichols (1814) 2 Phill Ecc 180; 161 ER 1113 Re Beech [1923] P 46 Re Knibbs [1962] 1 WLR 852; [1962] 2 All ER 829 Ryan v Kazacos (2001) 159 FLR 452 The Estate of Masters; Re Hill v Plummer (1994) 33 NSWLR 446 Timbury v Coffee [1941] HCA 22; (1941) 66 CLR 277 Wechsler v Du Maurier [2002] NSWCA 13 Whyte v Pollok [1882] 7 AC 400 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Darren Ackerley (Plaintiff) Charlene Felton (Defendant) Representation: S J Chapple (Plaintiff) D W Elliott (Defendant) Legal Aid Commission of NSW (Plaintiff) McIntosh Barr & Gordon (Defendant) File Number(s): SC296455 of 2008 Publication restriction: None
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate