By -

Key decisions

  • Estate Yee [2015] NSWSC 1574
  • Sharp v Attorney General of NSW [2015] NSWSC 1580
  • Singh v Singh [2015] NSWSC 1457
  • Re the estate of Allan John Young; ex parte Young [2015] WASC 409
  • Bronkhorst v Lloyd [2015] NSWSC 1618
  • Smith as administrator of the estate of Seaman v Seaman [2015] WASC 420
  • Robinson v Jones (No 3) [2015] VSC 508
  • C v W [2015] NSWSC 1774
  • Smilevska v Smilevska [2015] NSWSC 1794
  • Macoun v Commissioner of Taxation [2015] HCA 44
  • Manning v Matsen [2015] NSWSC 1801
  • Commissioner of Taxation v Australian Building Systems Pty Ltd (In Liquidation); Commissioner of Taxation v Muller and Dunn as Liquidators of Australian Building Systems Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) [2015] HCA 48

Interim distribution for beneficiary’s proper maintenance

In Roberts v Moses [2015] NSWSC 1504 the court considered an application for an interim family provision claim pursuant to s 62 Succession Act. The unusual features of the case, including the uncertainty of beneficiaries because the deceased left 23 documents with potential testamentary affect, meant that the court was unable to form an opinion on whether a family provision order would be made in favour of the plaintiff upon the final hearing of her application. However Kunc J made orders pursuant to s 92A Probate and Administration Act that the executors make an interim distribution to the plaintiff for her proper maintenance and support, conditional upon her making a deed charging her testamentary provision with the payment.

You've reached the end of this article preview

There's more to read! Subscribe to LSJ today to access the rest of our updates, articles and multimedia content.

Subscribe to LSJ

Already an LSJ subscriber or Law Society member? Sign in to read the rest of the article.

Sign in to read more