The family of one of Australia's most acclaimed artists says the weight of the world has slipped from their shoulders as he emerged the victor in a torrid legal fight with his estranged stepdaughter.
John Olsen, famed for his vivid landscape paintings, took Karen Mentink, daughter of his late wife Katharine Howard-Olsen, to the NSW Supreme Court last year seeking to recover a $2.2 million cash gift procured by Ms Mentink from her terminally ill mother in 2016.
Australian artist John Olsen.Credit:Brendan Esposito
Mr Olsen, 92, won the case and the court found Ms Mentink had acted unconscionably. The Bowral-based mother launched an appeal. On Friday, the NSW Court of Appeal upheld the decision.
Mr Olsen's son Tim said "John will be having a good night's sleep, which he hasn't had for a while".
It had been a "very arduous four years" and "for John, it's been a very sad experience", he said.
"He's happy but he's not jumping up and down in celebration," Mr Olsen jnr said. "He's taking it very humbly."
Karen Mentink outside the NSW Supreme Court last year.Credit:Ben Rushton
Mr Olsen jnr said "it's like the weight of the world has been lifted off the family's shoulders" and they were "very relieved".
"To be in your 90s [and] to go through this is a huge, a mammoth undertaking," he said. "Let's not forget he was also grieving the loss of his wife [of 27 years]."
The Supreme Court heard that in October 2016, two months before her mother's death, Ms Mentink drove her mother to the Commonwealth Bank where her mother withdrew and handed over $2.173 million. An additional $30,000 was transferred to pay off Ms Mentink's credit card debt.
Mr Olsen's barristers argued the $2.2 million transfer was unconscionable because it was given in the absence of any legal or accounting advice, and unfolded when Ms Howard-Olsen had a cognitive impairment following brain surgery.
In a judgment in September last year, Justice John Sackar said: "I am of the view that the deceased’s decision to transfer the funds to the defendant, and make this 'gift', was the result of unconscionable conduct and/or undue influence on the part of the defendant."
Justices Anthony Meagher and Anthony Payne said in a joint judgment that Justice Sackar "did not err in concluding that the gift ... should be set aside as resulting from the appellant’s unconscionable conduct".
Justice Sackar had also concluded the gift was procured through undue influence, and that finding was also left in place.
"The deceased was terminally ill and struggling to get her affairs in order, with little time in which to do so," Justices Meagher and Payne said.
In a separate judgment, Acting Justice Arthur Emmett said Ms Mentink "concealed the fact of the gift on occasions when an objective bystander would have expected her to mention ... such a large gift".
Ms Mentink was ordered to pay Mr Olsen's costs.
with Georgina Mitchell
Get our Morning & Evening Edition newsletters
Michaela Whitbourn is a legal affairs reporter at The Sydney Morning Herald.
Most Viewed in National
https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMihwFodHRwczovL3d3dy5zbWguY29tLmF1L25hdGlvbmFsL3ZlcnktcmVsaWV2ZWQtam9obi1vbHNlbi1oYXBweS1hZnRlci10b3JyaWQtbGVnYWwtZmlnaHQtb3Zlci0yLTItbWlsbGlvbi1jYXNoLWdpZnQtMjAyMDA4MjEtcDU1bzNlLmh0bWzSAYcBaHR0cHM6Ly9hbXAuc21oLmNvbS5hdS9uYXRpb25hbC92ZXJ5LXJlbGlldmVkLWpvaG4tb2xzZW4taGFwcHktYWZ0ZXItdG9ycmlkLWxlZ2FsLWZpZ2h0LW92ZXItMi0yLW1pbGxpb24tY2FzaC1naWZ0LTIwMjAwODIxLXA1NW8zZS5odG1s?oc=5
2020-08-21 13:50:00Z
CAIiEM4VaV2eXOnZWtlncFxykHkqGQgEKhAIACoHCAowxqmICzDg_IYDMIGkmwY
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "'Very relieved': John Olsen happy after torrid legal fight over $2.2 million cash 'gift' - Sydney Morning Herald"
Post a Comment