TRUSTEE SUED.

Press, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20712, 24 November 1932, Page 6

TRUSTEE SUED.

ACTION BY BENEFICIARY. .JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFF. A rlaim by a residuary legatee against a trustee, to recover the balance of an estate, was heard in. the Supreme Court yesterday before his Honour Mr Justice Ostler. The plaintiff was Juliet Christophers, nurse attendant, of Wellington (Mr S. W. Fitzherbert, of Wellington), and the defendant, was Henry Povnton Bridge, public accountant, of Christchurch, who appeared in person. The claim set out that under the will of Sarah Christophers, of Christchurch, her residuary estate was bequeathed to the plaintiff, a niece, who was a minor at the date of death. Plaintiff had made application to the defendant for the payment of the residuary estate, but had been refused. The defence was that defendant was willing to hand over the estate to the Public Trustee or to carry out the wishes of the testatrix as the Court should decide. Payment had been refused 011 the ground that plaintiff was an interested party and therefore could not be expected to protect the interests of the five, remaining minor legatees. Dispute Over Commission. Mr Fitzherbert said the defendant refused to pay over approximately unless he received a fee of fifty guineas, which, it was submitted, was an improper attitude on the part of a trustee The evidence to be placed before the Court was practically all in writing. There was a question of furniture which had been stored for some vears at the expense of the estate. 'Plaintiff had intimated that the furniture could be distributed. His Honour asked if the defendant had kept the furniture stored up to Ihe present date. Defendant replied that the furniture was still in store and the estate was paving the charges. Ultimately the furniture would be at the disposal of the plaintiff. . Juliet Christophers, plaintiff, evidence along the lines indicated by counsel. . . "Do vou bring this action entirely ot. vour own accord, or are you prompted )>v vour solicitor!'' asked defendant. '"I thought f would like the money now. There is no use waiting until I am about 40,'' replied witness. Comment by the Judge. •■There is no doubt in mv mind thai when the question of commission was dif'-ussed you were hanging on to the estato to endeavour to force tins lad} to pav vou the higher fee. It is as plum'as a pikestaff," said Ins Honoui to the defendant. . The defendant, addressing his Honour, said that, the estate had been prudently administered, and he had beon actuated bv the desire to carry out the wishes of the testatrix. He was now willing to hand over the estate to the Public Trusj tee. but he did not, think that the plain- ! tiff was the proper person to have control of the estate. Counsel for plaintiff said thaCthe accounts of the estate seemed quite satisfactorv with the exception of one item charging £lO 13s Gd for storage anil insurance on the furniture, which was valued for death duties purpose.' af The defendant explained that in he had taken away the furniture, which was then stored with Strange and Co., Ltd., and stored it with the Universal Bond and Free Store, of which fhe was the owner. Terms of the Judgment. "it is satisfactory to note." said his Honour, in delivering judgment, "that no charges of dishonesty are made against the defendant. All the charges are what might, be termed as arising out of neglect or delay or raising claims which defendant was not entitled at law to raise. T consider that the charge for storing and insuring the furniture is quite unreasonable, and defendant ought not to be allowed to charge the plaintiff with costs incurred by reason of his own delay. The furniture was stored for a considerable time in the defendant's own -warehouse and the law does not, allow any trustee to make a profit out of his trust. There were a number of lonjj delays caused by the defendant. By his conduct the defendant has deprived himself of the right to nnv commission at all.

"The defendant is ordered to pay to the Public Trustee the specific legacies given {o the infant legatees, together with the interest actually earned thereon since July 31st, 1927. The balance of trust moneys in the defendant's possession ore to be paid forthwith to the plaintiff's solicitor, after allowing to defendant all items of expense shown by him to September 30th, 1932, except the items for £lB as storage. The defendant is ordered to hand the furniture to the plaintiff. He is not to have any claim against the plaintiff for commission and is ordered to pay. the costs in the action.''