Just in Case Law Tanya Chapman

Council of the Law Society of New South Wales v Sideris [2024] NSWCATOD 3

Voice actors: Liam Schofield and Shay Riley-Lewis (solicitors at Baker Love Lawyers)

George Sideris had been a solicitor for more than 30 years when, in 2023, the Law Society of NSW applied for the removal of his practicing certificate.

He was accused of professional misconduct in persistently communicating directly with the opposing side (the Salvation Army) instead of going through their solicitor and also being discourteous in his communications.

Sideris argued that he couldn't have engaged in professional misconduct because he wasn't acting as a solicitor at the time he was assisting his mother-in-law in her negotiations with the Salvation Army.

What makes this case so interesting was the correspondence that had been sent by Sideris, all of which were in evidence.

Colin Olsen died at the 87 years. He was survived by his wife of 56 years, Beverley, and their three children. He also had a child from a previous relationship, Craig Olsen.

Colin's Will left his entire estate to Beverley.

Craig made an application for provision from the estate.

What makes this case particularly interesting was that Craig was a successful solicitor and the Court was critical of his self-drafted affidavits. And also the reason that Craig was seeking provision from his late father's estate - he said he needed the funds to do renovation on 2 of his wife's 5 properties.

The State of Western Australia v Mack [2012] WASC 127

WARNING: This episode involves violence and disturbing content.

In 2012, Brent Mack was found guilty of the murder of his mother Ah Bee Mack (known as Pauline). Brent was to inherit from his mother's estate however, the forfeiture rule provides that a person convicted of murder cannot inherit from the person they have killed.

Brent's brother Adrian was to inherit all of their late mother's estate. But he died before he received his inheritance and Brent was to inherit half of Adrian's estate. This would indirectly result in Brent receiving half of his late mother's estate, thereby benefiting from his crime.

That is, unless the forfeiture rule could be extended to cover indirect inheritance.

Lucas v Salman [2022] NSWSC 1301

It was a modern love story. George and Jill met in 1999 and fell in love. They each had children from previous relationships. George had two children (Paul and Joanne) and Jill had two children (Paul and Karl).

Jill died in February 2016 and her estate, including the matrimonial home, were inherited by George.

After Jill's death, George made a Will which would leave his estate equally to his two children and his two stepsons.

But only five months after Jill's death, George met Jodie on an online dating website and fell in love again. He changed his Will to make no provision for his stepsons.

After George's death, both of the stepsons applied for provision from his estate. What obligation did George have to make provision for his stepsons in his Will?

R v Gavare [2011] SASC 142

WARNING: DISTURBING CONTENT

On 3 December 2008, 83-year-old Vonne Isabelle McGlynn went missing from her home in Reynella, Adelaide.

6 days later, a woman named Angelika Gavare attended Vonne's bank and tried to withdrawn $2,000 from Vonne's account.

Investigating police discovered that Angelika had known Vonne, had approach Vonne several times seeking to become Vonne's carer. They also discovered that Angelika had began clearing out Vonne's home not long after Vonne went missing.

On 23 February 2009, police found Vonne's partial remains in the Christies Down Creek, across the road from Angelika's house.

Bar-Mordecai v Rotman [2000] NSWCA 123; Hillston v Bar-Mordecai [2003] NSWSC 89

The Bar-Mordecai saga involves a doctor (Michael Bar-Mordecai, 36 years old) who commenced a relationship with his patient (Eveline Hillston, 72 years old) and not only continued to act as her doctor, but also got her to work for free in his medical clinic.

Eveline died in 1994 and soon after started legal proceedings that would run for over a decade. Bar-Mordecai claimed that Eveline destroyed her Will and, as her de facto, her was entitled to her entire estate. The estate denied that a de facto relationship existed and wanted Bar-Mordecai to return the significant gifts he had receiving, including his share in the home and the site of his medical practice.

The relationship between Bar-Mordecai and Eveline spawned about 46 court judgements and I cover only the core issues in this three part series.

Part 1 we cover the background and the nature of the relationship between Bar-Mordecai and Eveline.

Part 2 we cover the probate proceedings, the allegations of undue influence and the family provision claim.

Part 3 we cover the application to force the sale of the home and the proceedings before the medical tribunal.