Rebecca Lane claims to be the natural child of Donald Algernon Gifford who in 2022 died at Auckland. She was gifted $5000 in his will. His estate is described as insolvent. She failed in attempts to have the Public Trust appointed as replacement executor and with it a requirement to challenge property transfers benefitting Mr Gifford’s long-term de facto partner. It was intended money dragged back into Mr Gifford’s estate would provide assets to satisfy her intended Family Protection Act claim.
Ms Lane has a history of Family Protection Act claims. She made a successful claim against her mother’s estate, netting her over three million dollars.
Mr Gifford previously had a relationship with Ms Lane’s mother. He referred to Rebecca in his will as his daughter. Her birth certificate records someone else as her father. No paternity tests were ever undertaken.
At the time of his death, Mr Gifford had been in a nearly thirty-year relationship with Anne Goldson. They lived separately. She made arrangements for Mr Gifford’s care when symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease became worse.
After learning of his Alzheimer’s diagnosis, Mr Gifford transferred his home in St Mary’s Bay, held in the name of a family trust, into Ms Goldson’s name. This property is valued at about four million dollars. She arranged and paid for his care in a dementia unit until his death.
Ms Lane challenged probate of Mr Gifford’s will remaining with Ms Goldson. The Public Trust should be appointed as a neutral trustee, she said. Ms Lane said she intends to bring a Family Protection Act claim against Mr Gifford’s estate. This would initially involve a challenge to Ms Goldson’s receipt of Trust assets. If successful, these assets would be transferred to the estate.
Intended litigation would also involve Ms Goldson’s rights to a relationship property claim, with not only the St Mary’s Bay property in the mix but also Ms Goldson’s personal business interests.
The High Court was told Mr Gifford had been appalled by Rebecca Lane’s past conduct in bringing a Family Protection claim against her mother’s estate. As a consequence, the two became estranged. This litigation dragged on for around four years. Evidence was given that she received a payout in excess of three million dollars.
Justice Downs ruled it was not appropriate to re-open management of Mr Gifford’s estate. The estate has no money. There was no certainty Public Trust would get court approval to advance the relationship property claim needed to generate funds necessary to enable a Family Protection Act claim by Ms Lane.
re Estate of Donald Gifford – High Court (20.09.23)
23.162