Armitage v Fraser [2020] NSWSC 979

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Armitage v Fraser [2020] NSWSC 979 Hearing dates: 13 and 14 May 2020 Date of orders: 30 July 2020 Decision date: 30 July 2020 Jurisdiction: Equity Before: Hallen J Decision: The Court: (1) Orders, pursuant to s 59 of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW), that in lieu of the provision made for her in Clause 5 of the Will of the deceased the Plaintiff receive, by way of provision, a lump sum of $135,000, out of the estate of the deceased. (2) Orders that no interest is to be paid on the lump sum if it is paid within 28 days of the date of the making of these orders; and if not so paid, interest is to be paid on any unpaid part thereof, calculated at the rate prescribed by s 84A(3) of the Probate and Administration Act 1898 (NSW), from the 29th day from the date of the making of these orders until the date of payment in full. (3) Orders that the burden of the provision be borne by Karen Francis Fraser (the Defendant), the sole residuary beneficiary named in Clause 9 of the Will of the deceased. (4) Orders that if the order for costs cannot be agreed within seven days, written submissions should be filed and served within fourteen days thereafter, and the issue of costs will be determined on the papers. (5) Orders that the Exhibits be dealt with in accordance with the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) (rr 31.16A and 33.10) and Practice Note No SC Gen 18. Catchwords: SUCCESSION – Family Provision – Claim by adult child of the deceased for provision under Ch 3 of the Succession Act – No dispute as to eligibility under s 57(1)(c) of the Act – Gift of personal effects and pecuniary legacy of $30,000 made for Plaintiff in the Will of the deceased – Reasons for the limited provision made for the Plaintiff stated in the Will of the deceased – Significant competing claim of the Defendant on the deceased's estate – Whether Plaintiff has been left without adequate provision for her proper maintenance and advancement in life – Whether an order for provision should be made for the Plaintiff's proper maintenance and advancement in life and, if so, in what amount Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), ss 60, 62, 98 Evidence (Audio and Audio-Visual Links) Act 1998 (NSW), ss 5B, 22C Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), s 72 Family Provision Act 1982 (NSW) Practice Note No SC Gen 18 Probate and Administration Act 1898 (NSW), ss 84A, 86 Succession Act 2006 (NSW), ss 3, 58, 60, 61, 63, 65, 66, 72, 84 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 304 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), rr 31.16A, 33.10 Cases Cited: Alexander v Jansson (2010) 6 ASTLR 432; [2010] NSWCA 176 Andrew v Andrew [2011] NSWSC 115 Andrew v Andrew (2012) 81 NSWLR 656; [2012] NSWCA 308 Antov v Bokan (No 2) [2019] NSWCA 250 Bartlett v Coomber [2008] NSWCA 100 Bkassini v Sarkis [2017] NSWSC 1487 Blendell v Blendell; Blendell v Blendell [2020] NSWCA 154 Boettcher v Driscoll (2014) 119 SASR 523; [2014] SASC 86 Bondelmonte v Blanckensee [1989] WAR 305 Borebor v Keane (2013) 11 ASTLR 96; [2013] VSC 35 Bosch v Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd [1938] AC 463 Bowditch v NSW Trustee and Guardian [2012] NSWSC 275 Bowyer v Wood (2007) 99 SASR 190; [2007] SASC 327 Brimelow v Alampi (2016) 50 VR 219; [2016] VSC 135 Burke v Burke (No 2) (2015) 13 ASTLR 313; [2015] NSWCA 195 Butcher v Craig [2009] WASC 164 Carey v Robson (No 2) [2009] NSWSC 1199 Carusi-Lees v Carusi [2017] NSWSC 590 Chan v Chan (2016) 15 ASTLR 317; [2016] NSWCA 222 Chapple v Wilcox (2014) 87 NSWLR 646; [2014] NSWCA 392 Christie v Manera [2006] WASC 287 Crossman v Riedel [2004] ACTSC 127 de Angelis v de Angelis [2003] VSC 432 Devereaux-Warnes v Hall (No 3) (2007) 35 WAR 127; [2007] WASCA 235 Diver v Neal [2009] NSWCA 54 Flathaug v Weaver [2003] NZFLR 730; (2003) 22 FRNZ 1035 Foley v Ellis [2008] NSWCA 288 Forsyth v Sinclair (No 2) (2010) 28 VR 635; [2010] VSCA 195 Gardiner v Gardiner (Supreme Court (NSW), Santow J, 28 May 1998, unrep) Goodman v Windeyer (1980) 144 CLR 490; [1980] HCA 31 Goodsell v Wellington [2011] NSWSC 1232 Gorton v Parks (1989) 17 NSWLR 1 Grey v Harrison [1997] 2 VR 359 Hall v Hall (2016) 257 CLR 490; [2016] HCA 23 Harkness v Harkness (No 2) [2012] NSWSC 35 Hawkins v Prestage (1989) 1 WAR 37 Heyward v Fisher (Court of Appeal (NSW), Kirby J, 26 April 1985, unrep) Hughes v National Trustees, Executors and Agency Company of Australasia Ltd (1979) 143 CLR 134; [1979] HCA 2 Hunter v Hunter (1987) 8 NSWLR 573 In re Green (deceased); Zukerman v Public Trustee [1951] NZLR 135 Kleinig v Neal (No 2) [1981] 2 NSWLR 532 Kohari v Snow [2013] NSWSC 452 Latoudis v Casey (1990) 170 CLR 534; [1990] HCA 59 Liprini v Liprini [2008] NSWSC 423 MacGregor v MacGregor [2003] WASC 169 Marks v Marks [2003] WASCA 297 McCosker v McCosker (1957) 97 CLR 566; [1957] HCA 82 McGrath v Eves [2005] NSWSC 1006 McKenzie v Topp [2004] VSC 90 Meres v Meres [2017] NSWSC 285 Norbis v Norbis (1986) 161 CLR 513; [1986] HCA 17 Palagiano v Mankarios [2011] NSWSC 61 Permanent Trustee Co Ltd v Fraser (1995) 36 NSWLR 24 Pincius v Wood [1998] TASSC 46 Pontifical Society for the Propagation of the Faith v Scales (1962) 107 CLR 9; [1962] HCA 19 R (M) v Slough Borough Council [2008] 1 WLR 1808; [2008] UKHL 52 Re Buckland (deceased) [1966] VR 404 Salmon v Osmond (2015) 14 ASTLR 442; [2015] NSWCA 42 Sam Wardy v Gordon Salier; William Wardy v Gordon Salier; Hassiba Wardy v Estate of late Edmond Wadih Wardy, developer and Ch 3 of the Succession Act 2006 [2014] NSWSC 473 Sgro v Thompson [2017] NSWCA 326 Shannon v Steinmetz [2019] HCASL 332 Singer v Berghouse (1994) 181 CLR 201; [1994] HCA 40 Slack v Rogan; Palffy v Rogan (2013) 85 NSWLR 253; [2013] NSWSC 522 Smith v Johnson (2015) 14 ASTLR 175; [2015] NSWCA 297 Steinmetz v Shannon (2019) 99 NSWLR 687; [2019] NSWCA 114 Stern v Sekers; Sekers v Sekers [2010] NSWSC 59 Stott v Cook (1960) 33 ALJR 447 Sung v Malaxos [2015] NSWSC 186 Taylor v Farrugia [2009] NSWSC 801 Tobin v Ezekiel [2012] NSWCA 285 Verzar v Verzar [2012] NSWSC 1380 Vigolo v Bostin (2005) 221 CLR 191 Walker v Walker (Supreme Court (NSW), Young J, 17 May 1996, unrep) White v Barron (1980) 144 CLR 431; [1980] HCA 14 Worsley v Solomon [2008] NSWSC 444 Yee v Yee [2017] NSWCA 305 Texts Cited: Rosalind Atherton, "The Concept of Moral Duty in the Law of Family Provision – A Gloss or Critical Understanding?" (1999) 5(1) Australian Journal of Legal History 5 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Jenny Ann Armitage (Plaintiff) Karen Francis Fraser (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: C Birtles (Plaintiff) T Catanzariti (Defendant)