‘No favourites’: Siblings court battle over $20 million of NSW farmland
A $20m farm inheritance has sparked a bitter court battle after two siblings were left just $600,000 each.
A brother, who solely inherited more than 3000 hectares of farmland worth $20 million from his father, has become embroiled in an ugly court battle with his two siblings, who claim they were promised the farm would be split three ways.
Third-generation farmer Wayne Bushell died aged 66 with kidney disease in 2021 and owned eight parcels of land totalling 3011 hectares of farmland in the near Barmedman, northwest of Temora in the NSW Riverina Region.
The land area, known as “Bridgefield Farm”, is more than twice the size of Lord Howe Island.
The court heard how his three children, Hannah, James and Abe, were told growing up that the farm would be split between them equally.
However, Mr Bushell changed his mind in the years leading up to his death after becoming estranged from James and Hannah, who had left the farm after school for university and their careers.
The court heard how, in June 2021, Mr Bushell decided to sell Abe, who had stayed on the farm his entire life, the entire $20 million farm for $1.2 million, with a plan to split that money between Hannah and James upon his death.
Hannah and James took their brother to court, arguing that the $600,000 each was “paltry” compared to the overall value of the estate.
The pair said that Abe’s takeover of the farm was a “serious departure” from the promises made to them over the course of “decades” as to an eventual three-way split.
In court, James sought a provision of $7 to $8 million, while Hannah sought an amount of $4 million.
“James recalls discussions during his childhood in which his father said: ‘Eventually the farm will be split evenly between you three. There will be no favourites, it will all be split equally.
No one will be left out’,” the court heard.
Hannah told the court about a conversation she had with her father when she was about 20 during her third year of university.
“The farm will be split evenly between you three. No one will be left out,” she claims her father told her.
The court was told Mr Bushell started to change his mind about his estate in 2015 after he and the children’s mother Jo divorced.
The court heard how Mr Bushell had a “falling out” with Hannah and James shortly afterwards.
As a result, he wrote a fresh will in December 2015, where he wrote: “My relationship with James and Hannah has deteriorated over the past and has come to a point where we do not speak to each other anymore. I do not think there is any prospect of conciliation.”
After being diagnosed with kidney disease, Mr Bushell hired a new lawyer and wrote his final will in May 2021.
He told his new lawyer that he wished to leave Abe the farm as he was “the one who has been working on the farm and that he had been doing so since he was 17 or 18”.
The court also heard how he told the new lawyer in February 2021: “I would never promise 1/3 each. It would send the business broke. Abe has done all the work.”
“James has only spent about 12 months on the farm. He likes to think he was the overseer while Abe was the worker … Abe has been good to me; James has not helped at all.
“I will leave $600,000 between the two of them. They have been obnoxious from the start. Hannah has done nothing on the farm. She comes and just takes stuff.”
Mr Bushell was moved to an assisted living facility in Wagga Wagga in December 2019.
Hannah told the court that she became “increasingly concerned” about Wayne’s health in late 2020 and feared her father was being pressured by Abe into “making decisions about the [farm] that were not in his best interest”.
NSW Supreme Court Justice James Hmelnitsky ruled that Mr Bushell’s promises during their childhood were not “binding” and that their father was “entitled” to change his mind on how to split his estate.
“Those statements were not binding promises and it was not reasonable for Hannah and James to rely on them as such,” Judge Hmelnitsky said in his decision.
Judge Hmelnitsky found the $600,000 was “adequate” for James as he held stable employment in the public service, with his claim for further provision was dismissed.
However, Judge Hmelnitsky found the $600,000 was “not adequate” for Hannah as she was the main income earner for a family of four and carried significant household debt.
Judge Hmelnitsky ordered Hannah receive a further provision of $300,000, bringing her total provision to $900,000.
The parties will be heard on legal costs in the coming months.
Originally published as ‘No favourites’: Siblings court battle over $20 million of NSW farmland
