News
![Naaman v Jaken Properties Australia Pty Limited & Ors [2025] HCA 1](https://9selborne.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/High-Court.jpg)
![Liprini v Thirdi William Street Pty Ltd [2023] NSWSC 1375](https://9selborne.com.au/wp-content/plugins/wp-latest-posts/img/default-image.svg)
Please join us in congratulating Katrina Howard SC for being recognised in Chambers and Partners 2025 Asia Pacific Guide. Katrina continues to be the only female silk ranked in Band 1 of the Intellectual Property: The Bar – Australia listings.
See the rankings here.
Today, in a decision of great significance for the law of trusts, the High Court dismissed an appeal from a decision of the New South Wales Court of Appeal. John Kelly SC, Simon Shepherd and Adrian Maroya appeared for the successful respondents (who succeeded as appellants in the Court of Appeal). The High Court appeal concerned whether a successor trustee owes a fiduciary obligation to a former trustee in respect of the former trustee’s entitlement to be indemnified out of trust assets (or the commensurate beneficial interest in the trust assets that the former trustee retains) following replacement of the former trustee by the successor trustee.
The High Court (by majority) held that a successor trustee does not owe a fiduciary obligation to a former trustee in respect of the entitlement of the former trustee to indemnification out of the trust assets, or the commensurate beneficial interest that the former trustee has in the trust assets. The majority held that the explanation for that answer lies in the nature of a trustee’s entitlement to indemnification out of the trust assets being an entitlement to have the trust assets applied for the purpose of recouping expenditure or exonerating liability properly incurred by the trustee. Accordingly, the remedies of equitable compensation and account are not available to the former trustee against the third parties.
Read the full judgment here.
Adrian Maroya’s recent victory in the NSWSC appearing for the Rooty Hill Pigeon Racing Club has been reported on in the The Sydney Morning Herald.
Seventeen plaintiffs brought a claim against the defendant, the Rooty Hill and District Pigeon Racing Club Inc (the Club). The plaintiffs sought a declaration that each of them was a member of the Club, on the basis that (despite most of them not having been involved in the affairs of the Club nor having paid annual membership fees for many years) and an order invalidating the adoption in 2017 by the club of a new constitution.
The plaintiffs alleged that the rules of the Club contained express terms including, in particular, that “a person ceases to be a member of the association if the person – (a) dies; (b) resigns that membership; or (c) is expelled from the Association. The plaintiffs next alleged that each plaintiff became a member of the Club, and that each plaintiff had not died, resigned from membership nor been expelled: thereby remaining members of the Club (despite the non-payment of fees).
By its defence, the Club contended that, even if certain of the plaintiffs had at one time been members the Club, they had ceased to be members by reason of non-payment of membership fees, many years’ inactivity and non-involvement with the Club’s affairs.
Justice Robb dismissed all the claims, save for the first plaintiff’s, in a detailed judgment containing important insights into the law of incorporated associations, membership rights and abandonment of membership, noting ([97]) that: “it seems to be entirely logical that, when a member of an association has not resigned in compliance with the formalities contained in its constitution, but over a long period of time has by the member’s conduct sufficiently manifested an intention to cease being a member, that implied resignation or abandonment of membership should be effective, subject to contrary provisions in the constitution.”
Read the full judgement here.
We are delighted to see our barristers receiving recognition in The Legal 500 (Legalease) 2024 Asia-Pacific rankings.
Andre Zahra SC and Thomas Bagley have been recognised as Leading Senior and Junior Counsel in Commercial Disputes, with Katrina Howard SC being listed as a Leading Silk in TMT and IP law. See the full publication here.
We would like to extend our deepest appreciation to our clients and peers who gave outstanding references and comments, which include the following:
Katrina Howard SC – ‘Katrina is a very quick study in any technology with a particular focus on pharma and biopharma work. She is a tremendous advocate on very tricky scientific cases and presents matters simply and clearly to the court. She is also a fearless advocate.’
Thomas Bagley – ‘Incredible breadth of legal knowledge in a range of practice areas. Strong advocacy skills unled. His advocacy style is calm, measured and focused, leading the Court through the client’s points methodically and purposefully. Very strong in drafting pleadings and submissions.’
