NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Strojczyk v Kopycinzki [2006] NSWSC 589
HEARING DATE(S) : 27 January 2006
JUDGMENT DATE : 16 June 2006
JURISDICTION : Equity Division
JUDGMENT OF : Associate Justice McLaughlin at 1
DECISION : I stand the matter over to a date to be fixed by arrangement with my Associate for the bringing in of short minutes to reflect the foregoing proposed orders.
CATCHWORDS : Succession. Family Provision. Claim by elderly widower. Marriage of almost eighteen years. Financial and material circumstances of the Plaintiff. Whether Plaintiff has been left without adequate provision for his proper maintenance. Need of Plaintiff for accommodation. Competing claims of Deceased's children (who are chief objects of her testamentary beneficence).
LEGISLATION CITED : Family Provision Act 1982
CASES CITED : Singer v Berghouse (1994) 181 CLR 201 Vigolo v Bostin (2005) 79 ALJR 731
PARTIES : Henryk Strojczky (Plaintiff) Eva Kopycinzki (Defendant)
FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 1226 of 2005
COUNSEL : Mr. L. Ellison SC (Plaintiff) Mr. C. M. Simpson (Defendant)
SOLICITORS : Doherty Partners (Plaintiff) Philip Goldman & Co (Defendant)
- 14 - IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE McLAUGHLIN
Friday, 16 June 2006
1226 of 2005 HENRYK STROJCZYK –v- EVA KOPYCINZKI JUDGMENT 1 HIS HONOUR: These are proceedings under the Family Provision Act 1982. 2 By summons filed on 27 January 2005 Henryk Stojczyk claims an order for provision for his maintenance and advancement in life out of the estate and/or notional estate of his late wife Gladys Strojczyk (also known as Gladys Bush) (to whom I shall refer as "the Deceased"). 3 The Deceased died on 23 July 2003, aged 77. She left a will dated 21 March 2000, probate whereof was on 7 October 2003 granted to Eva Kopycinski, the executor named in such will (who is the Defendant to the present proceedings). 4 The Plaintiff and the Deceased married on 2 November 1985. Each of them had previously been married (the Deceased had been twice widowed), and each had adult children, who were no longer dependent upon them. No children were born to the marriage of the Plaintiff and the Deceased.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate