Georgia Vlahos died in February 2022, leaving her home in Sydney’s west to be split equally between her daughter Panagiota, her son Nick and Nick’s two children.
The will – prepared in 2015 – appointed Panagiota executor and included a right to reside there for up to twelve months rent-free following her death.
Nick raised concerns regarding the validity of the will noting that Georgia had referred to him as Nicholas throughout despite his legal name being Nick.
He suspected his mother had been a ‘prime target for manipulation’ by his sister and issued a court challenge which he apparently abandoned in early 2023.
By December 2023, Panagiota, who was still residing at the home in Belmore, had obtained a Grant of Probate.
Despite Nick’s requests to engage a real estate agent to sell the property, no steps were taken.
He filed proceedings in May 2024 to require the executor enter into an agency agreement and sell the property and in the meantime pay rent at $700.00 p/w from December 2023.
Although the parties had exchanged some offers of settlement, no agreement was reached, and the proceedings remained in abeyance.
Rather than take steps to list the property on the open market, the executor sought a private-treaty sale to the Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs, the local football club whose Belmore Oval and club facilities were located right next door.
The club made several offers to purchase the home, initially for $1.8 million, then $1.85 million, and eventually $2 million, but the executor refused each one, holding out for at least $2.39 million.
Eventually, in August 2024 the Bulldogs made a conditional offer at $2.07 million which it later withdrew after conducting a formal inspection.
The property was eventually sold at auction in April 2025 for $1.98 million, with settlement occurring in July of that year.
As the property had been sold, the only issue requiring resolution by the court was who should be responsible for the costs of the legal disputation.
To resolve the costs dispute, it examined the executor’s conduct.
Justice Guy Parker in the NSW Supreme Court was not impressed with Panagiota’s delay in administering the estate’s assets. He observed that the “executor’s year” which she claimed ameliorated her delay had begun on the date of her mother’s death, not on the issuing of the grant of probate.
Regardless, he declared, an executor is not entitled to ‘sit on their hands.’ Panagiota had a duty to sell the property to the benefit of the beneficiaries as quickly as reasonably possible.
Panagiota could and should have applied for a grant of probate sooner, and she declined to pay any occupation fee and ignored the beneficiaries’ request for her to pay all property outgoings consistent with the beneficiaries’ interests. Third, she ignored repeated and reasonable requests for updates on the negotiations and sale of the property and created an ‘information vacuum’.
Her conduct had, he ruled, effectively provoked the litigation.
He rejected her bid to have her brother pay her legal costs. He also declined to make an order that the executor’s costs be paid from the estate and left indemnity to the end‑of‑administration account when all expenditures can be reviewed “in the round”.
Panagiota is no doubt ruing that she had not moved diligently after her mother’s death and had failed to take prompt steps along the way.
Vlahos v Vlahos [2025] NSWSC 1612 Parker J, 23 December 2025
