Bishop, Re Lorna (Deceased)
| Jurisdiction | Barbados |
| Judge | Greenidge, J. |
| Judgment Date | 29 June 2005 |
| Neutral Citation | BB 2005 HC 18 |
| Docket Number | No. 224 of 2004 |
| Court | High Court (Barbados) |
| Date | 29 June 2005 |
High Court
Greenidge, J.
No. 224 of 2004
Mr. Clyde Turney QC, attorney-at-law for the applicant.
Mr. Nigel Jones attorney-at-law for the respondent.
Succession - Intestacy — Deceased dying intestate — Three adult children consisting of brother and two sisters entitled to one third share each — Brother promising to apply for grant of representation with consent of other sister — Whether Court to exercise discretion in favour of one over the other in atmosphere of distrust between the siblings — Succession Act, ss. 6, 19, 49(5) — Guidelines regarding grant and distribution — Grant ordered in favour of sister who was first in time to apply.
Lorna Bishop died on the 10th February 2001 in Barbados. She and her husband had relocated to Barbados from England. They settled in St. James. Mr. Bishop predeceased his wife. They had three children — Charlotte Lisa Southgate, Adam Bishop and Hillary Knight. When Mrs. Bishop died she left real property at Greenwich House, St. James. She operated two businesses — an antique furniture shop and a dairy farm managed by her son Adam, since her death Adam has carried on the dairy farm and collected rents from the tenants of three houses the property of the estate of Lorna Bishop. Disputes arose between Adam and Charlotte regarding the antique furniture business and Charlotte's lifestyle which involved the use of narcotic substances and depletion of the viability of the antique business. Eventually Charlotte returned to England and Hillary came back to Barbados to look after the estate of her mother in which all three children have an equal one third share on intestacy and in respect of which she could get no information or cooperation from her brother Adam as she claims.
The relationship between these two is somewhat strained. There is the further problem that Adam had shortly after the death of his mother in February 2001 accepted that he would take out administration of her estate but up to 27th July 2003 had not made the application for a grant. It was on this date that his sister Hillary with the consent of their sister Charlotte applied for a grant there are now therefore two separate applications for a grant of administration to the estate of Lorna Bishop by on the one hand two of her children and on the other hand by their brother Adam, the application by Hillary with the consent of Charlotte was first in time on the 5th August 2003. On 18th August 2003 Adam sought to obtain a joint grant to Hillary and himself on her application. On 21st November 2003 Adam too filed an application for a sole grant to him of administration to the estate of his mother. Hillary then entered a caveat to a grant to Adam. That caveat was waived by Adam and appearance entered by Hillary. There now being two competing applications in the estate directions are now sought by the parties.
The issue for determination now is how the Court should exercise its discretion to order a grant of representation in the estate. In considering this question the Court observes that Adam waited until after Hillary had applied for a grant of representation to apply for a similar grant of representation to the estate.
The Court also observes that from the time he indicated he would take out a grant-shortly after the death of his mother in February 2001 – his only preparation was to obtain his own birth certificate — not those of his siblings. He has closed out the accounts at First Caribbean Bank which he says were held jointly between himself and his mother. He has destroyed records kept by his mother which he alleges were infested with cockroaches, termites and rodents such records as he has regarding the dairy business he has not shared with his sisters nor has he given any account of rents collected.
Hillary has carried on the antique business with the assistance of a manager having injected her own funds into the business and operates an account in her name in respect of this business....
To continue reading
Request your trial