Leenane Templeton – Newcastle Business Accountants, Business Advisors & Financial Planners Leenane Templeton – Newcastle Business Accountants, Business Advisors & Financial Planners Leenane Templeton – Newcastle Business Accountants, Business Advisors & Financial Planners Leenane Templeton – Newcastle Business Accountants, Business Advisors & Financial Planners
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Team
    • Awards
    • Testimonials
    • Careers
  • Services
    • Tax Returns For Individuals
    • Accounting & Tax
      • Business Advice
      • Tax Advice
      • Accounting Software Solutions
      • Corporate Taxation
      • Estate Planning
      • FBT and Salary Packaging
      • GST Advice
      • Risk Management
      • Starting a Business
      • Superannuation
      • Trust Planning
      • Xero Accounting Software
    • Business Advice
      • Tax Planning
      • Starting a Business
      • Asset Protection
      • Cashflow Strategies
      • Banking
      • Benchmarking
      • Business Health Check
      • Business Coaching
      • Budgeting
      • Business Planning & Growth
      • Business Systems & Reporting
      • Buying A Business
      • Compliance
      • Cloud Based Solutions
      • Forecasting
      • Marketing Advice
      • Property Advice
      • Selling A Business
      • Structuring
      • Succession Planning
      • Wealth Creation
      • Xero Accounting Software
    • Financial Advice
      • Aged Care
      • Asset Protection
      • Debt Management
      • Estate Planning
      • Family Office Services
      • Investment Strategy
      • Philanthropy
      • Buying Property
      • Risk insurance
      • Retirement Plans
      • Superannuation Planning
      • Taxation Planning
      • Trust Strategies
      • Wealth Creation Strategies
    • Self Managed Super Funds
      • Setting Up a SMSF
      • SMSF Administration
      • SMSF Property
      • SMSF Investment Planning
      • Family Super Funds
      • Limited Recourse Borrowing Arrangements
      • The SMSF Association – Accredited SMSF Advisors
    • Insurance & Risk
      • Life Insurance
      • Income Protection
      • Disability Cover
      • Trauma Insurance
      • Business Risk
    • Business Marketing
      • Get More Customers
      • Online Marketing Strategies
  • News
    • Newsletters
    • Articles
    • Videos
    • Events
    • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • CLIENT LOGIN
Leenane Templeton – Newcastle Business Accountants, Business Advisors & Financial Planners Leenane Templeton – Newcastle Business Accountants, Business Advisors & Financial Planners
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Team
    • Awards
    • Testimonials
    • Careers
  • Services
    • Tax Returns For Individuals
    • Accounting & Tax
      • Business Advice
      • Tax Advice
      • Accounting Software Solutions
      • Corporate Taxation
      • Estate Planning
      • FBT and Salary Packaging
      • GST Advice
      • Risk Management
      • Starting a Business
      • Superannuation
      • Trust Planning
      • Xero Accounting Software
    • Business Advice
      • Tax Planning
      • Starting a Business
      • Asset Protection
      • Cashflow Strategies
      • Banking
      • Benchmarking
      • Business Health Check
      • Business Coaching
      • Budgeting
      • Business Planning & Growth
      • Business Systems & Reporting
      • Buying A Business
      • Compliance
      • Cloud Based Solutions
      • Forecasting
      • Marketing Advice
      • Property Advice
      • Selling A Business
      • Structuring
      • Succession Planning
      • Wealth Creation
      • Xero Accounting Software
    • Financial Advice
      • Aged Care
      • Asset Protection
      • Debt Management
      • Estate Planning
      • Family Office Services
      • Investment Strategy
      • Philanthropy
      • Buying Property
      • Risk insurance
      • Retirement Plans
      • Superannuation Planning
      • Taxation Planning
      • Trust Strategies
      • Wealth Creation Strategies
    • Self Managed Super Funds
      • Setting Up a SMSF
      • SMSF Administration
      • SMSF Property
      • SMSF Investment Planning
      • Family Super Funds
      • Limited Recourse Borrowing Arrangements
      • The SMSF Association – Accredited SMSF Advisors
    • Insurance & Risk
      • Life Insurance
      • Income Protection
      • Disability Cover
      • Trauma Insurance
      • Business Risk
    • Business Marketing
      • Get More Customers
      • Online Marketing Strategies
  • News
    • Newsletters
    • Articles
    • Videos
    • Events
    • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • CLIENT LOGIN
Mar 27
deceased estate

Can a surviving spouse claim their deceased spouse’s super when they are also the executor of their estate?

  • March 27, 2019
  • Self managed super funds, SMSF

The recent case of Burgess v Burgess [2018] WASC 279 (‘Burgess’) continues a line of cases that consider the conflict that arises where a person acts as executor of a deceased estate while also receiving superannuation death benefits in their personal capacity.

Broadly, Burgess and the following cases revolve around the executor/administrator’s duty to collect assets of the deceased on behalf of an estate. As a fiduciary role, an executor/administrator must not, without proper authorisation, allow their personal interests to conflict with their obligations owed to the estate.

These cases are sure to have an increasing impact on death and succession planning in an SMSF context as around 70% of SMSFs are two-member funds and, in relation to couples, each spouse typically appoints their spouse as executor of their estate. Accordingly, many surviving spouses may thrust into a position of potential conflict in relation to their duties as an SMSF trustee\director and as an executor.

McIntosh v McIntosh – administrator was held to be conflicted

McIntosh v McIntosh [2014] QSC 99 (‘McIntosh’) involved a mother who was appointed as the administrator of her deceased son’s estate. While acting in that role, the mother also applied to three of her son’s industry/retail super funds to receive his death benefits in her personal capacity, which she received. If these death benefits had instead been paid to the estate they would have been distributed equally between her and her former husband (as the deceased parents) under the laws of intestacy in Queensland as their son died without a will.

After some legal posturing between the mother’s and the father’s lawyers, the mother filed an application in the Queensland Supreme Court to determine the matter which found:

… there was a clear conflict of duty … contrary to her fiduciary duties as administrator. When the mother made application to each of the superannuation funds for the moneys to be paid to her personally rather than to the estate, she was preferring her own interests to her duty as legal personal representative to make an application for the funds to be paid to her as legal personal representative. She was in a situation of conflict which she resolved in favour of her own interests. As such she acted … in breach of her fiduciary duty as administrator of the estate …


Accordingly, the mother was required to account to the estate for the super benefits she had personally received. Also of note was in this case was the fact that the mother was a nominated beneficiary in respect of each of the super funds via non-binding nominations. Had binding death benefit nominations (‘BDBNs’) been in place, no conflict would have arisen.

Brine v Carter – executor was held not to be conflicted

Brine v Carter [2015] SASC 205 examined a potential conflict arising in the case of an executor which did not require the executor to account to the estate. Professor Brine had appointed his three children and Ms Carter, his de facto spouse, as the executors of his estate. Professor Brine had two super accounts/pensions in the same industry super fund. As one pension had no residual value and could only be paid to his surviving spouse, the dispute related to the remaining pension, which could be paid to a dependant or the legal personal representative (deceased estate). Professor Brine had completed a non-binding death benefit nomination in favour of his legal personal representative to receive this pension amount.
 
Ms Carter applied to the super fund trustee to receive the benefits in both accounts in her personal capacity.
 
Ms Carter had previously represented to the other three executors on multiple occasions that the estate was not an eligible beneficiary of the super benefits. However, after making their own enquiries, the deceased’s three children found out that they could claim the death benefit on behalf of the estate and proceeded with this claim.
 
The super fund trustee then exercised its discretion to pay both pension benefits to Ms Carter and the remaining executors formally disputed this decision. Due to her conflict, Ms Carter recused herself from any discussions or actions relating to the dispute notice issued to the fund trustee by the executors and did not object to it but remained an executor. Ms Carter in fact made further submissions to the trustee in her personal capacity claiming the benefits.
 
After the super fund trustee affirmed its decision and other dispute processes provided no further recourse, the remaining executors applied to the South Australian Supreme Court for an order that Ms Carter account to the estate for these benefits. The court found that:
 
Ms Carter was in a position of conflict regarding her duties as an executor.

Ms Carter’s appointment as an executor via the deceased’s will, while providing some acknowledgement by the deceased of a conflict, was not by itself sufficient to overcome her position of conflict. Rather, a specific conflict authorisation was required.
 
As the other executors claimed the super benefits on behalf of the estate and had full knowledge about their rights prior to the super fund trustee’s decision, they effectively consented to Ms Carter claiming the benefits in her personal capacity despite her conflict. From that point, Ms Carter did not act in breach of her duty as an executor as there was no connection between her breach and the benefit she received.
 
Ms Carter was not required to account to the estate.
 
Brine v Carter provides a particular set of facts that resulted in a somewhat incongruous outcome that allowed an executor to apply for and receive death benefits in her personal capacity despite a potential conflict arising. The court noted that had the other executors not been aware of Ms Carter’s application, and had they also not made an application on behalf of the estate, Ms Carter would have been liable to account to the estate. This outcome was therefore due to the particular facts in this case. In many other factual scenarios, the conflict could easily have resulted in the spouse having to account to the estate.

Burgess v Burgess – sacred trustee obligations
 
In Burgess v Burgess [2018] WASC 279 Mr Burgess died without leaving a will in May 2015 and was survived by his wife and two minor children. A year after his death, Mrs Burgess applied to become administrator of his estate and was appointed on 27 June 2016.
 
Mr Burgess had super benefits in four large public offer funds and Mrs Burgess made a claim to two of those funds to be paid her deceased husband’s death benefits. She applied for and received benefits from one fund prior to her appointment as administrator and applied for and received benefits from another fund after her appointment.
 
Mr Burgess’ estate (including any super paid to the estate) would be split among Mrs Burgess and their two young children. By the time of hearing, one super fund had paid benefits to the estate. The fourth fund had not yet made any payment and Mrs Burgess had not made any application to it. Further, there were no BDBNs in place in relation to any of the funds.
 
Due to the uncertainties, Mrs Burgess herself made an application to the Western Australian Supreme Court. Ultimately, the court followed the principles in McIntosh and found that:
 
Mrs Burgess would retain the benefits from the first super fund, as she was not an administrator at the time of application and thus no conflict had arisen in relation to the first fund.
 
Mrs Burgess was required to account to the estate for the benefits applied for and received after she was appointed. There was a conflict of interest and as administrator she was bound to claim the benefits on behalf of the estate after she was appointed administrator.

Mrs Burgess was bound to claim the remaining super benefits on behalf of the estate.
 
The court’s comments in Burgess demonstrate the strict fiduciary obligations placed on an executor or administrator. Martin J explained Mrs Burgess’ obligations at para [84] as follows:
 
In an age of increasing moral ambivalence in western society the rigour of a court of equity must endure. It will not be shaken as regards what is a sacred obligation of total and uncompromised fidelity required of a trustee. Here, that required the administrator not just to disclose the existence of the (rival) estate interest when claiming the superannuation moneys in her own right from the fund trustee. It required more. It required her to apply as administrator of the estate for it to receive the funds in any exercise of the fund trustee’s discretion.
[Emphasis added]

 
Martin J gave the following comments at para [85] regarding the fiduciary duties of an executor:
 
The interests of a deceased estate require a ‘champion’ who cannot be seen (even if they are not) to be acting half-heartedly, or with an eye to achieving outcomes other than an outcome that thoroughly advances the interests of the estate – to the exclusion of other claimants.
 
Martin J made the point that the undesirable outcome in this case might have been avoided had Mr Burgess made a will that explicitly contained a conflict authorisation or if he had signed BDBNs in relation to his super benefits. In lamenting the outcome Martin J at para [91] stated:

The result is, of course, messy for the family and less clear cut than might otherwise have been desired. However, that is a result of wider trustee integrity policy principles of the law which take effect and prevail. They are of vital importance and are applicable to universal circumstances extending well beyond the present rather regrettable factual situation. The present is a situation, I reiterate, that might have been avoided by the two measures I earlier mentioned.

Other important cases

In the case of Re Narumon [2018] QSC 185 the court considered whether attorneys under an enduring power of attorney (‘EPoA’) could validly execute both a BDBN confirmation/extension as well as a new BDBN on behalf of a member. Whether an attorney will have such power will depend on the SMSF governing rules, the EPoA document, the relevant powers of attorney legislation in the applicable state/territory and the federal superannuation legislation.
 
In Re Narumon the member (Mr Giles) became incapacitated and his attorneys under an EPoA, his wife (Mrs Giles) and his sister (Mrs Keenan), purported to both extend a prior lapsed BDBN and to execute a new BDBN, both of which provided for death benefits to be paid to them. The EPoA document did not expressly authorise the attorneys to enter into a conflict transaction. The Court found that the extension of the prior BDBN was valid since:
 
the fund’s governing rules allowed the prior BDBN to be confirmed and provided that any power or right of a member could be exercised by an attorney;
 
while the EPoA document did not expressly deal with superannuation matters, the meaning of ‘financial matters’ in the relevant (Queensland) legislation was wide enough to cover superannuation; and
 
while a ‘conflict transaction’ entered into by an attorney can invalidate a transaction, the confirmation of the prior BDBN was not a conflict transaction. While the BDBN benefited the attorneys it was found not to amount to a conflict as it simply ensured the continuity of Mr Giles’ prior wishes.

 
However, the new BDBN executed by Mrs Giles and Mrs Keenan was found to be a conflict transaction as it provided for a different payment of death benefits which slightly benefited Mrs Giles more than the extended BDBN. Thus, the new BDBN was invalid.
 
In the case of Re Marsella; Marsella v Wareham (No 2) [2019] VSC 65 the deceased’s daughter, who was also a co-trustee, was ordered to repay death benefits back to the fund and was removed as a trustee along with her co-trustee husband for acting ‘grotesquely unreasonable’ in conflict of her trustee duties and in bad faith. This case explores the high legal standards placed on SMSF trustees and highlights the need for careful attention to SMSF succession planning.

SMSFs

It is important to consider the impact of these cases from an SMSF perspective as it is typical for the spouse of a deceased SMSF member to also be an executor or administrator of that member’s estate. In such a situation, a potential and real conflict may arise between the executor/administrator’s obligations as trustee of the estate and their desire to receive superannuation death benefits in their personal capacity.

These cases reiterate the importance of planning for death and SMSF succession. In all cases, the conflict difficulties would likely have been avoided had the deceased had a will with appropriate conflict authorisations and/or BDBNs were in place to remove the trustee’s discretion as to whom death benefits could be paid.

In any super death benefits matter, advisers and trustees should ensure that applications to receive benefits are not made without first considering, among other things, the possible conflict implications. Moreover, advisers should recommend that their clients proactively implement SMSF succession and death benefit strategies that ensures the surviving spouse is not placed in a position of conflict that could undermine their ability to receive their spouse’s death benefits. This might involve special provisions in wills, EPoAs, BDBNs, death benefit deeds and other legal documents.

Conclusion

This line of cases illustrates that the courts treat the fiduciary duties of an executor/administrator in a strict and ‘sacred’ manner. Further, the courts will uphold these obligations despite what might be seen as a strict and inflexible approach resulting in an ‘unfair’ outcome.

For further help with succession strategies to overcome these risks please contact our advisors.

Without proper prior planning, SMSF members could be left with conflicts, resulting in substantial time and cost hurdles in the event there is any dispute.


*        *        *
 
This article is for general information only and should not be relied upon without first seeking advice from an appropriately qualified professional.

Article written and provided by permission of DBA Lawyers – Shaun Backhaus, Lawyer and Daniel Butler, Director DBA Lawyers.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit
  • Pinterest
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • E-Mail

Leave a reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Archives

  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015

Categories

  • Accounting
  • Accounting Awards
  • ATO
  • Budget
  • business accountant
  • Business Accounting
  • Business Activity Statement BAS
  • Business Advice
  • Business Tax
  • CGT
  • charity
  • christmas party
  • COVID-19
  • Economy
  • employer
  • End Of Financial Year
  • Estate Planning
  • Federal Budget
  • Financial
  • Financial Advisor
  • Financial Planning
  • Fringe Benefits
  • GST
  • Insurance
  • Interest rates
  • Investment
  • Investment Property Tax
  • Lifestyle
  • Marketing Advice
  • money
  • partnership accounts
  • PAYG
  • recession
  • retirement
  • Santa
  • Self managed super funds
  • SMSF
  • SMSF Technical
  • superannuation
  • Tax Accountant
  • Tax Planning
  • Taxation
  • trust

Other Pages

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Team
  • Awards
  • Testimonials
  • Careers
  • Blog
  • Videos
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Site Map
  • Client Login

Our Services

  • Tax Accountant
  • Business Accountants
  • Financial Advisors Newcastle
  • Self Managed Super Funds Newcastle
  • Life Insurance Newcastle
  • Estate Planning
  • Retirement Planning
  • Xero Accountant Newcastle
  • Newcastle Business Advisor
  • Newcastle Marketing Advisor
  • Newcastle Tax Returns

Newcastle Accountant Follow

Newcastle Accountants Leenane Templeton are Chartered Accountants, Business Advisors, Financial Planners, Self Managed Super Fund Specialists and Risk advisors.

Leenanes
leenanes Newcastle Accountant @leenanes ·
20 May

Don’t wait until EOFY to think tax! 🗓️
Proactive tax planning could mean less stress & more savings.
Here’s why acting early pays off 👉
🔗

#TaxTips #EOFY #AccountingAustralia #TaxPlanning #SmallBusinessAU

Reply on Twitter 1924698709570552274 Retweet on Twitter 1924698709570552274 Like on Twitter 1924698709570552274 Twitter 1924698709570552274
leenanes Newcastle Accountant @leenanes ·
8 May

🚨 EOFY is coming!
Boost your partner’s super - Under current superannuation rules, you have until 30 June to roll over up to 85% of your previous year’s concessional contributions into your spouse’s super account.
🔗

#EOFY #Superannuation #FinanceTips

Reply on Twitter 1920275215613112837 Retweet on Twitter 1920275215613112837 Like on Twitter 1920275215613112837 Twitter 1920275215613112837
leenanes Newcastle Accountant @leenanes ·
29 Apr

🚀 Small business owners, don't miss out! The Instant Asset Write-Off lets you claim immediate deductions on assets. 💼 Save on tax & invest smarter today.

Learn more 👉

#SmallBusiness #TaxTips #Australia

Reply on Twitter 1917009485274747169 Retweet on Twitter 1917009485274747169 Like on Twitter 1917009485274747169 Twitter 1917009485274747169
leenanes Newcastle Accountant @leenanes ·
14 Apr

📉 Confused about the bond market in today’s volatile economy?
Discover how interest rates, inflation & central banks shape bond yields—and what it means for your investments. 👇
🔗

#Investing #Bonds #FinanceTips #AussieInvestors

Reply on Twitter 1911931567863370079 Retweet on Twitter 1911931567863370079 Like on Twitter 1911931567863370079 Twitter 1911931567863370079
Load More

Contact Info

Head Office:
484 Hunter Street
Newcastle NSW 2300
Australia
Offices in:
Sydney – Brisbane – Newcastle

Phone: 02 4926 2300 Fax: 02 4926 2533 E-Mail: success@leenanetempleton.com.au Web: www.LT.com.au
© 2024 Leenane Templeton Disclaimer and Privacy Statement. Website created by Harlan @ Leenane Templeton

Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.