Executrix Judy's Legal Responsibility for Property and Financial Obligations - Essay Sample

Introduction

Being the executrix, Judy has the legal responsibility to take care of the property left behind by Moll. She also bares that financial obligations. Judy is, therefore, responsible for payment of the bills, taxes and any payment required to be made on the property left. Despite Judy being the executrix, According to the will left by Moll, the property at 16 Barbara Street, Pymble in the State of New South Wales, belongs to the Executrix. However, there is a condition under which the right to property operates and this is upon payment of all rates, taxes and other outgoings such as premiums on any insurance policies drug in the existence of her life interest. After death, the will become binding and it was to be considered the property of Judy as the executrix.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

According to Australian law, the inheritance of a deceased's property is governed by the inheritance laws which determine what property or asset should go who, as indicated in the will. At such a time, the will serves an important function to make the work easier for the executor to determine what should go to who. Based on the kind of inheritance law at play, Judy is the executor and is supposed to use the written will to divide the property left by Molly amongst the beneficiaries. In doing so, she is supposed to determine the property and the percentage of the said property that should go to the particular individual (Head & Mann, 2015). Based on the case, it is assumed that all the property that Molly has enlisted belongs to her and is not in any way shared. According to the law, the ownership of a property is determined by the name of the title of that property. As such, if all the listed properties were owned by Molly, he had all the rights to give his properties.

From the will, Molly stated, "I give my property at 16 Barbara Street, Pymble in the State of New South Wales to my Executrix upon trust for Edwina Evans to reside therein for life on the condition that she shall pay all rates, taxes, and other outgoings including premiums on any insurance policies during the existence of her life interest and it is my wish that, for so long as the said Edwina Evans shall reside or have the right to reside in the property, my daughter Delores Morgan will also reside therein and share the costs herein referred to."

Delores Morgan also possesses the right to the property but upon sharing the cost involved.

Whether the NDS Is Entitled To the $750,000 Referred To In Clause 4 of Molly's Will

Before his death, Molly had stated that NDS would be given $750,000 to promote its functions. In his thoughts, Molly had intended that all his property goes to the rightful people as well as for the right function. In Equity law, courts allow the parties involved to reach a consensus about the property of the deceased (Hardingham, Neave, & Ford, 2013). Where a will has been left, the court has an easy time stating what should go to who as the court deals with what the deceased wrote, not unless there arises conflict, and the court finds it worth to resolve the matter. Equity is a significant principle in Australia as it enables the best possible result based on the facts which have been provided by the plaintiff.

In the case at hand, Molly had stated that he had given $750,000 to the NDS of New South Wales. After Molly's demise, Judy finds that the Nuclear Disarmament Society of New South Wales has positive plans to help the society. Some of the plans include peace as well as disarmament in the region, promote and organize conferences, meetings, and seminars to handle issues that touch on peace, to campaign for nuclear disarmament peace, promote rules and policies to enhance peace within the region and ensure maximum peace is promoted in the region.

The plans described above are positive to the enhancement of societal peace. According to Australian law, a person may give out part of his wealth to an organization, provided that the organization intends to do something that will contribute positively to the society. In this case, the Nuclear Disarmament Society of New South Wales intends to impact the society positively. As such, the Nuclear Disarmament Society of New South Wales is entitled to the share given by Molly in his will.

As things stand, the Nuclear Disarmament Society of New South Wales has the right to get $750,000. However, the will can be challenged in court, and Judy can challenge it in court.

Person Entitled To the Beneficial Interest in the IRS Shares

Before his death, Molly executed a deed with Edwina that he will assign her beneficial interest the shares in Integrated Research Systems Ltd (IRS). Following their agreement, Edwina paid Molly the amount that they had agreed of $500 the following day. This means that Edwina had fulfilled her part of the bargain and paid the required amount. Thus, after Molly's death, it was Edwina was entitled to a beneficial interest in the IRS shares.

According to law, a will is supposed to be executed by the executor. In this case, the executor was Judy Jackson. As such, she was the one accorded the responsibility of locating the money as well as the property that Molly had left behind. She was supposed to go through the will keenly and determine beneficiaries and award them all that is supposed to be awarded to them. In the case of Molly, Judy is supposed to go through all the documents and ensure that all the information recorded has been keenly checked.

As agreed by both Molly and Edwina, there were some conditions that Edwina was supposed to fulfill before being given the IRS shares. Judy is supposed to check whether the conditions set have been fulfilled. From what had been stated, it is clear that Edwina had fulfilled the promises that had to be fulfilled before being granted the IRS shares. Having fulfilled all those conditions, the shares rightfully belongs to Edwina.

After Molly's death, Judy finds that the market value for the IRS shares is $1,250,000 and that the profits that had been earned for the 2018-2019 financial year were to be applied to expand its business operations and that there were no dividends which had been declared for that financial year. Judy also finds that the same is likely to happen in the following year. While these are financial related matters, they tend to change the figure that was left for Edwina since the company continues to expand, and the company continues to grow. Despite this, it does not change the ownership of the IRS shares. As such, Edwina still remains the rightful owner of the interest, as promised by Molly.

Person Entitled to the Rose Bay House

In the case under discussion, Denise had promised Molly verbally that if she was going to die, under normal circumstances, Molly should take charge of the house in Rose Bay, but this appears to be a special case. Denise even went to telling Molly where the title deeds were. The title deeds were in the glove box of the p79. This is an indication that Denise was serious about what she was saying and was determined to give the house to Molly. After they had this discussion, Denise died meaning that the house had been left to him. However, this was a verbal will and not a written one. This complicates the case. Based on this, it is possible to argue that the Rose Bay house was left to Glynn Davies.

A verbal will is considered legal but may be more problematic when compared to the written will. Verbal wills are usually problematic when it comes to execution. They are mainly viable as a codicil. Although they are enforceable, they are very difficult to enforce and in the case of a verbal will, it is important to ensure that there is one disinterested or a neutral individual. This will ensure that the person acts as a witness and that all the terms agreed on are heard by the impartial person so that they can be executed accordingly. Molly is supposed to inherit the Rose Bay house but this has not been captured in Molly's will.

The other complications that would make Glynn Davies the beneficiary of the house and Molly is that Denise made this promise as she was sick and thus not in a very good health state. It could be possible that she was overexcited, and this made her make such a promise. There could be a possibility that Denise was not in her right senses when she made this promise. Besides, there was not a proper reason as to why Denise decided to give part of her property to Molly without letting her husband know. While this is not a legal requirement, it is a moral requirement to avoid cases coming up later as some parties dispute the will (Neal, 1991).

It is essential to state that an oral will, which is also referred to as a nuncupative will or deathbed, will is spoken to the beneficiary when the person is sick. Such wills are not valid in all states. There are some states which do not take such wills seriously. While it is possible that Molly could make a case requiring the house to be transferred to his name, the husband is likely to object to this and request any witnesses who heard the house being given to Molly.

However, another interesting fact arises here. Molly visited Denise on 3 October 2019 and that is the time that Denise promised Denise to give the house to her if she did not survive. Denise then died on 11 October 2019. This means that there was a week in which Molly could have went for the title deed or made the promise known to the authorities. However, it is not possible to dwell on this right now since it is just an assumption, and it has not been mentioned anywhere in the will. It is thus assumed that the executor, Judy, will share the properties as captured in the will. The House is not in the will and thus, no one will get to know about it since Molly also dies during Denise's funeral. It is at the funeral that Molly would have made everything known to the people but this does not happen. She dies at the same time.

It is also imperative to note that upon the death of both Molly and Denise, the executor, Judy realizes that Denise had left her entire estate to her husband Glynn Davies. With this in mind, Judy should consider the verbal agreement between Molly and Denise null and void and give the house to Glynn Davies.

Conclusion

By and large, for properties of the deceased to be inherited, he or she needs to write a will that will be used in the sharing of the properties. A written will is more valuable than a verbal will. Although there are instances where a verbal will may be implemented, it is always very difficult to implement it. However, for a written will, the appointed executor determines what should go to who.

References

Hardingham, I. J., Neave, M. A., & Ford, H. A. J. (2013). Wills and intestacy in Australia and New Zealand. Sydney: Law Book Co.

Head, M., & Mann, S. (2015). Law in perspective: Ethics, society and critical thinking. Sydney: UNSW Press.

Neal, D. J. (1991). The rule of law in a penal colony: Law and power in early New South Wales. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.