No special circumstances which would justify overriding deceased’s wishes as to who his personal representatives should be

Probate - application to pass over respondents who are named as executors of will - and to appoint independent legal personal representative instead - s.27(4) Succession Act 1965 - pursuant to will daughters appointed - wife predeceased the deceased a few months earlier - daughters beneficiaries - applicant son - bequests included family home, commercial property and holiday apartment - son estimates value properties at €1.4m, €1.2m, and €400,000 respectively - no grant extracted within the executors year - exceeded only by a few days - grant not issued - heavy opposition by applicant - court notes serious allegations made by applicant - caveat lodged - deceased suffered dementia in last 6 years - applicant previously had objected to registration of respondents as attorneys over deceased in High Court - allegations of misappropriation of funds - court notes it was withdrawn - further notes failure to back up claims with evidence - s.27(4) where it is necessary and expedient to do so - applicant contends delayed in extracting a Grant of Probate - that failure to protect the assets of the estate - that respondents unfit persons given misappropriation funds from when attorneys - consideration correct legal test - serious misconduct or other serious reasons are shown to have occurred or be present - what is required to pass over an executor pursuant to s. 27(4) does not differ in substance from circumstances in which a Grant of Probate will be revoked - special circumstances must be sufficiently serious in nature to justify departing from the testator’s wishes - court not satisfied that reliance on the “executor’s year” justifies removal of the respondents as executries - court notes complexity of the estate - fact respondents prepared for the Grant of Probate by arranging valuations - also took specialist legal advice - consideration failure to protect assets of estate - consideration alleged misappropriation of funds - court finds no misappropriation of funds - court ultimately finds there has been no impropriety on the part of the executrices - no “special circumstances” within the meaning of s. 27(4) - application refused.