Marino Lawย acted for the successful plaintiff in a complex and protracted estate dispute, in which Justice Richmond delivered judgment in ๐๐ถ๐ณ๐ค๐ฉ ๐ท ๐๐ณ๐ช๐ฑ๐ฐ๐ญ๐ฐ๐ฏ๐ฆ [2025] NSWSC 86.
The case centred on three key issues:
1๏ธโฃ Failure to Rent the Property โ Whether the defendant was liable for not leasing the Blacktown property before its sale.
2๏ธโฃ Self-Dealing โ Whether the sale of the estateโs principal asset, the Blacktown property, should be set aside due to the defendantโs breach of the self-dealing rule.
3๏ธโฃ Revocation of Letters of Administration โ Whether the defendant should be removed as administrator of the estate for breaching her fiduciary duties.
๐๐ฒ๐ ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ฑ๐ถ๐ป๐ด๐
1๏ธโฃ Failure to Rent: His Honour found that the defendant took reasonable steps and was not liable for failing to lease the Blacktown property.
2๏ธโฃ Breach of Self-Dealing Rule: His Honour found that:
Trustees are prohibited from purchasing trust property under what is known as the self-dealing rule. Under this rule, โ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ด๐ข๐ญ๐ฆ ๐ฃ๐บ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ต๐ณ๐ถ๐ด๐ต๐ฆ๐ฆ ๐ฐ๐ง ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ต๐ณ๐ถ๐ด๐ต ๐ฑ๐ณ๐ฐ๐ฑ๐ฆ๐ณ๐ต๐บ ๐ต๐ฐ ๐ฉ๐ช๐ฎ๐ด๐ฆ๐ญ๐ง ๐ช๐ด ๐ท๐ฐ๐ช๐ฅ๐ข๐ฃ๐ญ๐ฆ ๐ฃ๐บ ๐ข๐ฏ๐บ ๐ฃ๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ฆ๐ง๐ช๐ค๐ช๐ข๐ณ๐บ ๐ฆ๐น ๐ฅ๐ฆ๐ฃ๐ช๐ต๐ฐ ๐ซ๐ถ๐ด๐ต๐ช๐ต๐ช๐ข๐ฆ, ๐ฉ๐ฐ๐ธ๐ฆ๐ท๐ฆ๐ณ ๐ฉ๐ฐ๐ฏ๐ฆ๐ด๐ต ๐ข๐ฏ๐ฅ ๐ง๐ข๐ช๐ณ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ต๐ณ๐ข๐ฏ๐ด๐ข๐ค๐ต๐ช๐ฐ๐ฏ ๐ข๐ฏ๐ฅ โ๐ฆ๐ท๐ฆ๐ฏ ๐ช๐ง [๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ด๐ข๐ญ๐ฆ] ๐ช๐ด ๐ข๐ต ๐ข ๐ฑ๐ณ๐ช๐ค๐ฆ ๐ฉ๐ช๐จ๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ณ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ข๐ฏ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ข๐ต ๐ธ๐ฉ๐ช๐ค๐ฉ ๐ค๐ฐ๐ถ๐ญ๐ฅ ๐ฃ๐ฆ ๐ฐ๐ฃ๐ต๐ข๐ช๐ฏ๐ฆ๐ฅ ๐ฐ๐ฏ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ฐ๐ฑ๐ฆ๐ฏ ๐ฎ๐ข๐ณ๐ฌ๐ฆ๐ต’
Although the defendantโs husband purchased the Blacktown property, it was found to be purchased on the defendant’s behalf, and she was aware that court approval could have been sought.
As a result, the transaction breached the self-dealing rule and was set aside on conditions.
3๏ธโฃ Removal of the Administrator: His honour found that:
The defendant, based on her own admissions, breached her duty by intermingling the estates assets with her personal assets.
An administrator of a deceased estate has a duty to keep proper accounts and records of the income and expenses of the estate. There was an ongoing dispute over whether the defendant kept proper accounts of what was received and paid in relation to the estate, and this ongoing issue ought to be resolved by an independent administrator.
Her breach of the self-dealing rule further warranted removal.
๐ข๐๐๐ฐ๐ผ๐บ๐ฒ
His Honour Justice Richmond ordered:
โ
The removal of the defendant as administrator
โ
The appointment of an independent administrator.
โ
The setting aside of the Blacktown property sale, subject to conditions.
This decision underscores the strict application of the self-dealing rule and its importance in protecting beneficiaries of deceased estates and reinforces the importance of personal representatives understanding their fiduciary duties.
Marino Law is proud to have successfully represented the plaintiff in this matter, ensuring accountability and the proper administration of the estate.
Turch v Tripolone [2025] NSWSC 86 (21 February 2025)
If you need assistance with any of the above, please don’t hesitate to give our office a call on 07 5526 0167 to speak with one of our highly qualified and experienced estate litigation lawyers or email [email protected].
