NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Charlwood v Charlwood [2017] NSWSC 1033 Hearing dates: 19 and 20 July 2017 Date of orders: 10 August 2017 Decision date: 10 August 2017 Jurisdiction: Equity Before: Hallen J Decision: Stands the proceedings over for no more than 14 days to enable the parties to consider the form of the proposed orders that are required to give effect to these reasons and for any argument as to the nature and form of the orders proposed.
Directs that if agreement is reached on the form of the orders, Short Minutes of Order may be forwarded to the Court, for consideration, in Chambers, so that the orders proposed may be made and entered and the adjourned date be vacated.
The matter is adjourned to a convenient date prior to 30 August 2017. Catchwords: SUCCESSION – FAMILY PROVISION – The Plaintiff, an adult child of the deceased, makes a claim for a family provision order – No dispute as to the Plaintiff's eligibility as a child of the deceased – The Defendant also an adult child of the deceased and a beneficiary named in the Will –– Reasonably sized estate in value principally comprising real property – Plaintiff and Defendant share equally the estate under terms of the Will - Competing financial claim advanced by the Defendant – Whether family provision order should be made, and if so, the nature and quantum of the provision to be made Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) Family Provision Act 1982 (NSW) Probate and Administration Act 1898 (NSW) Succession Act 2006 (NSW) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) Cases Cited: Boettcher v Driscoll [2014] SASC 86; (2014) 119 SASR 523 Bondelmonte v Blanckensee [1989] WAR 305 Bosch v Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd [1938] AC 463 Bouttell v Rapisarda [2014] NSWSC 1192 Bowditch v NSW Trustee and Guardian [2012] NSWSC 275 Butcher v Craig [2009] WASC 164 Burke v Burke [2015] NSWCA 195 Carey v Robson (No 2) [2009] NSWSC 1199 Chan v Chan [2016] NSWCA 222 Chapple v Wilcox [2014] 87 NSWLR 646; NSWCA 392 Christie v Manera [2006] WASC 287 Coffey v Coffey (No. 2) [2015] NSWSC 338 Crossman v Riedel [2004] ACTSC 127 de Angelis v de Angelis [2003] VSC 432 Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v P (1987) 11 NSWLR 200 Diver v Neal [2009] NSWCA 54 Flathaug v Weaver [2003] NZFLR 730; (2003) 22 FRNZ 1035 Foley v Ellis [2008] NSWCA 288 Goodman v Windeyer (1900) 144 CLR 490; [1980] HCA 31 Goodsell v Wellington & Ors [2011] NSWSC 1232 Grey v Harrison [1997] 2 VR 359 Harkness v Harkness (No 2) [2012] NSWSC 35 Hawkins v Prestage (1989) 1 WAR 37 Henry v Hancock [2016] NSWSC 71 Hughes v National Trustees Executors & Agency Co of Australasia Ltd (1979) 143 CLR 134; [1979] HCA 2 Hunter v Hunter (1987) 8 NSWLR 573 Hyland v Burbidge [2000] NSWSC 12 Kleinig v Neal (No 2) [1981] 2 NSWLR 532 Kohari v Snow [2013] NSWSC 452 MacGregor v MacGregor [2003] WASC 169 Marks v Marks [2003] WASCA 297 Mayfield v Lloyd-Williams [2004] NSWSC 419 McCosker v McCosker (1957) 97 CLR 566; [1957] HCA 82 McGrath v Eves [2005] NSWSC 1006 Meres v Meres [2017] NSWSC 285 Pontifical Society for the Propagation of the Faith v Scales (1962) 107 CLR 9; [1962] HCA 19 R v Registrar of Melbourne County Court [1927] VLR 406; (1927) 33 ALR 270 R (on the application of M) v Slough Borough Council [2008] UKHL 52; [2008] 1 WLR 1808 Rappard v Williams [2013] NSWSC 1279 Re Buckland, Deceased [1966] VR 404 Salmon v Osmond [2015] NSWCA 42 Saravinovska v Saravinovski (No 5) [2015] NSWSC 128 Singer v Berghouse (1994) 181 CLR 201; [1994] HCA 40 Slack v Rogan & Anor; Palffy v Rogan & Anor (2013) 85 NSWLR 253; [2013] NSWSC 522 Smith v Johnson (2015) 14 ASTLR 175; [2015] NSWCA 297 Stern v Sekers; Sekers v Sekers [2010] NSWSC 59 Stott v Cook (1960) 33 ALJR 447 Taylor v Farrugia [2009] NSWSC 801 Underwood v Gaudron (2015) 324 ALR 641; [2015] NSWCA 269 Verzar v Verzar [2012] NSWSC 1380 Vigolo v Bostin (2005) 221 CLR 191; [2005] HCA 11 Walker v Walker (Supreme Court (NSW), Young J, 17 May 1996, unrep) White v Barron (1980) 144 CLR 431; [1980] HCA 14 Wilcox v Wilcox [2012] NSWSC 1138 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mr Mark William Charlwood (first Plaintiff) Ms Thi Thanh Hong Luu (second Plaintiff) Mr Graeme Thanh Charlwood by his tutor Thi Thanh Hong Luu (third Plaintiff) Mr George Albert Thanh Charlwood by his tutor Thi Thanh Hong Luu (fourth Plaintiff) Mr Graeme Desmond Charlwood (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr J Trebeck (Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants) Mr L Ellison SC (Defendant/Cross Claimant)
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