The High Court has ruled that a probate firm must pay half of the costs of a beneficiary after the firm failed to progress the administration of his late mother’s estate.
Chorus Law, based in the Midlands, was instructed in 2013 by Marquita Murphy to administer the estate of her mother, Eileen Gaskin, who had died apparently intestate in 2012. Murphy also executed a power of attorney in favour of Chorus Law.
She told Chorus Law that she was not living at her late mother’s property, but was clearing it ready for sale.
In April 2015, solicitors acting for Trevor Gaskin, Eileen Gaskin’s son, wrote to Chorus Law to complain that the property had not been sold and that in fact, Murphy was living there.
In January 2016, as no further progress had been made, legal action against Murphy was threatened to remove her as a personal representative of the estate. Chorus Law proposed standing down as administrator provided its fees were paid from the estate and a no costs order made.
The proposal was not accepted and the company was removed as the administrator in May 2017.
Master Clark, in hearing Gaskin v Chorus Law Ltd & Anor found that where there is a delay of more than a year in realising assets, the burden was on the representative to show some valid reason. She said that “on any basis [Chorus Law] should have stepped down as administrator before the order was made”.
Combined costs in the case came to £180,000, which was nearly half of the value of the estate. She ruled that Chorus Law must pay half of Gaskin’s costs, with the other half to be paid by Murphy.
As a private client expert, what is your opinion of this case?
