This was an Application by beneficiaries seeking to compel questioning of a co-executor, Mr. Muench, in relation to three pending estate-related Applications. The Applicants relied on Rules 5.17 and 6.8, arguing that Mr. Muench, as a party adverse in interest, had not submitted an Affidavit and might possess relevant and material information.

The Court declined to grant the Application. It held that where one co-executor has provided Affidavit evidence on behalf of the estate, Rule 5.17 is not automatically engaged absent evidence that the co-executors were not acting unanimously, that the existing evidence was incomplete, or that the affiant was an unsuitable witness. No such evidence was present. The Court applied the unanimity requirement under Section 37 of the Estate Administration Act and found no reason to believe that Mr. Muench possessed undisclosed information or had acted independently of the active co-executor, Ms. Tyler.

The Court also held that Rule 6.8 was not engaged, as Affidavits had already been submitted by the estate and the beneficiaries had not met the threshold to justify further questioning of Mr. Muench. The Applicants were granted leave to renew the Application following cross-examination of Ms. Tyler, should new evidence arise indicating a reasonable possibility that Mr. Muench held relevant and material undisclosed information.