A millionaire lawyer behind a failed squatter’s rights case has had a separate bid to claim the inheritance of a wealthy Sydney solicitor from his adult daughter sensationally thrown out of court.
The NSW Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed Yael Abraham’s long-running probate claim against Annie Goldberg, ordering the retired solicitor and self-described children’s rights activist to pay Ms Goldberg’s legal costs in a scathing judgment blasting her “egregious” and “inexcusable” behaviour.
“This is a clear case for dismissal based upon Ms Abraham’s continuing default in compliance with the court’s orders,” Justice Michael Slattery said.
“Ms Abraham’s recent conduct in not complying with the court’s financial orders shows both disrespect for the authority of the court and a willingness to continue to engage in brinkmanship, slow-walking these proceedings to keep them progressing at a pace which suits her. The court is confident that if it were to allow these proceedings to continue, she would comply with only the court’s orders that suited her, when they suited her.”
Justice Slattery said Ms Abraham’s “conduct in response to the motion [to dismiss] has been so egregious that the court will make an indemnity cost order against her in respect of those costs”.
“Ms Abraham’s delay in prolonging the proceedings has been very much focused on conduct related to the motion and that delay may correctly described as ‘inordinate’ and accompanied by aggravating features which are more than mere delay,” he said.
Ms Abraham, whose unrelated squatter’s rights claim over a $3 million pair of Sydney terraces was thrown out of the NSW Supreme Court early last year, first brought the proceedings in March 2022, seeking to set aside wills left by Ms Goldberg’s parents in favour of two alternative wills that allegedly appointed Ms Abraham as sole executor of their estates.
Leon Goldberg, a well-known criminal solicitor, died in June 2020 aged 91. His former partner, Carol Goldberg, died in January 2014.
Carol and Leon Goldberg left behind a substantial estate that included properties in Vaucluse, the Blue Mountains, Dulwich Hill and Ambarvale, thought to be worth at least $20 million.
In 2022, one of Leon’s properties — a dilapidated and abandoned old shop on a waterfront block on Fitzwilliam Street, Vaucluse — was sold at auction for $17.1 million. At the time of her death, Carol’s primary asset was her Ambarvale home, valued at $450,000.
Ms Goldberg was their only child.
Ms Abraham, who lives in a six-bedroom Gold Coast mansion, has no biological relationship to Leon but claimed to have been his friend and confidante — a claim denied by Ms Goldberg, who alleged in court the 2014 and 2015 wills were forgeries.
Neither side’s claims were tested at trial.
In May last year, Justice Slattery rejected Ms Goldberg’s motion to have the case dismissed outright but issued a stern warning to Ms Abraham not to continue her “unacceptably chaotic conduct of the proceedings”, including repeated “highly disruptive” failures to appear for hearings and changes of lawyers.
Despite being told she was on thin ice after a “long period” of substantial procedural defaults and being “granted several indulgences”, Ms Abraham “defaulted fully again” following Justice Slattery’s May orders, and Ms Goldberg’s motion to dismiss was reheard in February.
In dismissing the case on Thursday, Justice Slattery revealed for the first time the scale of Ms Abraham’s fortune, after she was ordered last May to provide a detailed affidavit on her financial situation.
Ms Abraham had partially blamed her prior conduct on a lack of funds.
“The court was sceptical of that claim, especially as she had practised as a solicitor for 25 years,” Justice Slattery said.
“Ms Abraham’s affidavit disclosed gross assets in the order of $11.28 million and liabilities in the order of $5 million (with net assets therefore of $6.28 million).
“This affidavit also disclosed that Ms Abraham is the (sole) owner of a six-bedroom, seven-bathroom, four-car garage property on the Gold Coast in Queensland, and had recently sold her four-bedroom, three-bathroom property in the NSW southern highlands for $2.401 million (receiving net proceeds of sale in the order of $1.794 million).
“Ms Abraham also had cash of $146,160 and owned some vacant land in Canungra, Queensland, which Ms Abraham assessed as worth $715,000 and which she was attempting to sell.”
Justice Slattery said he had previously been willing to “give her the benefit of the doubt” but the financial disclosure meant the court’s “willingness in the first judgment to forgive her past procedural defaults was secured by her on a false basis”.
“Ms Abraham has misled the court about the reasons why she has been unable to comply with court orders,” he said.
“Had the court known her true financial position in May 2025, she is less likely to have been afforded the indulgence she was given at that time, due to the egregious nature of her defaults up to then. Second, a preparedness to make false statements to the court about her financial position indicates she cannot be relied upon to adhere to any future timetable to bring these proceedings to a timely conclusion.”
Justice Slattery said Ms Abraham had continued to cause “unacceptable” delays last year, including in securing new legal representation after the retirement of her solicitor and paying interim costs orders for failing to appear at “wasted directions hearings”.
He highlighted one overdue payment to Ms Goldberg that required repeated requests from her lawyers.
“She effectively slow-walked making this payment to suit herself in a manner which was plainly likely to add to the legal costs of Ms Goldberg by generating further correspondence chasing up the overdue $2000,” Justice Slattery said.
“This failure to pay Ms Goldberg quickly is at one level only about a relatively small sum in these proceedings. But at another level it strongly demonstrates that Ms Abraham continues to choose to cause inconvenience to Ms Goldberg and the court in this litigation instead of honouring her court-ordered obligations in a timely fashion.
“Ms Goldberg should never have needed to chase a diligent litigant in Ms Abraham’s position. Given her intelligence and resources a court can only infer that Ms Abraham is not a diligent litigant by choice.”
Justice Slattery said Ms Abraham’s professional experience, “substantial financial resources and the very clear warnings from the court in the first judgment about the consequences of her further noncompliance with its orders” made her conduct “inexcusable”.
“[Ms Abraham] cannot be relied upon to conduct this litigation in accordance with the Court’s orders and timetables and the objectives mandated by Civil Procedure Act 2005,” he said.
The costs order relates only to the motion to dismiss, rather than the rest of the proceedings, to reflect the “unreasonable financial waste which she unleashed by her contest of the motion”.
“The dividing line may be difficult to draw between motion costs and other costs, but the court may have to draw it if the parties cannot agree,” Justice Slattery said.
“Ms Goldberg should relist the proceedings for directions concerning the balance of the proceedings, namely her cross-claim, which seeks probate of Leon’s 2018 will and Carol’s 2013 will and family provision relief. Much of the cross-claim may no longer be necessary.”
Ms Abraham told the court last year she had brought the proceedings for altruistic reasons for the benefit of the beneficiaries of the 2014 and 2015 wills — which included herself, her daughter, the United Israel Appeal and the NSW Friendship Circle.
Carol’s purported will stated that Ms Goldberg was to be given “the sum of $80 pw”, while Leon’s gave 50 per cent of his estate to be held on trust by Ms Abraham for Ms Goldberg, declaring that she “suffers from a mental illness” and is “not capable of managing her own financial affairs”.
“Ms Abraham says she was not involved in the preparation either of Carol’s 2014 will or Leon’s 2015 will,” Justice Slattery said in his ruling last year.
“But Ms Abraham has not so far adduced any evidence as to who prepared these wills. Ms Abraham has at various times been asked to bring into Court the originals of Carol’s 2014 will, and Leon’s 2015 will. She has produced neither. She has made available what she claims are photocopies of the original of each will.”
At the agreement of both parties, the photocopy documents were examined by handwriting expert Melanie Holt, who delivered her report in July 2023.
“It concludes that there is moderately strong support for the hypothesis that someone other than Leon wrote the signature on the 2015 will and that the 2015 will contains anomalies throughout that bring its veracity as a whole [into] question,” Justice Slattery said.
“Due to the limited number of available specimen signatures provided for Carol, Ms Holt was unable to reach a conclusion concerning the testator’s signature on the 2014 will but she observed anomalies throughout the 2014 will, which brought its veracity into question.”
Ms Abraham strongly denied she was involved in any forgery “and that if it turns out the wills are forgeries then she says the forgeries must have been engineered by others”. “The issue is yet to be decided at trial,” Justice Slattery said last year.
He noted that in certain cases “where forgery by some person is established, or strongly indicated, after a civil trial, this might lead to the referral of the proceedings to the Attorney-General for consideration of a prosecution” carrying a possible prison sentence of 14 years.
“Such referrals are made from time to time after the outcome of civil trials where forgery is alleged,” he said.
This did not occur as the claim of forgery was never decided.
“By drawing attention to this, the Court is not indicating any view that forgery has occurred in this case but merely reminding both parties that civil litigation can be very consequential beyond its central contest,” Justice Slattery said.
A lawyer for Ms Goldberg on Friday said her client declined to comment.
Ms Abraham did not respond to requests for comment.
Read related topics:Sydney