Thyssen v Pottenger [2003] NSWSC 787

Thyssen v Pottenger [2003] NSWSC 787

The Plaintiff's claim was dismissed because she failed to make full and frank disclosure of her financial and material circumstances, including current Supreme Court of Victoria litigation and an ANZ Bank account; she did not establish any relevant present need for provision; and, in any event, she did not establish factors warranting the making of the application under section 9(1) of the Family Provision Act 1982. The small estate and the strong competing claims of beneficiaries Suzanne and Sandra further weighed against any provision.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 August 2003
Procedural Posture
Proceedings Under the Family Provision Act 1982 for Provision Out of the Estate And/or Notional Estate of Nicolaas Jacob Marker / Judgment After Hearing of the First Plaintiff's Claim; the Second Plaintiff's Claim Had Been Resolved by Consent
Outcome
The claim of the First Plaintiff Natalie Veronica Thyssen was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['claim by Former Wife' 'eligible Person' 'factors Warranting the Making of the Application' 'financial Need' 'full and Frank Disclosure of Financial Circumstances' 'competing Claims of Beneficiaries' 'costs']
['succession' 'family Provision' 'wills and Estates'] ['claim by Former Wife' 'eligible Person' 'factors Warranting the Making of the Application' 'financial Need' 'full and Frank Disclosure of Financial Circumstances' 'competing Claims of Beneficiaries' 'costs']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Proceedings Under the Family Provision Act 1982 for Provision Out of the Estate And/or Notional Estate of Nicolaas Jacob Marker / Judgment After Hearing of the First Plaintiff's Claim; the Second Plaintiff's Claim Had Been Resolved by Consent

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the First Plaintiff, as a former wife of the Deceased, established relevant need for provision out of the estate.' 'Whether there were factors which warranted the making of the application under section 9(1) of the Family Provision Act 1982.' 'Whether the competing claims of the beneficiaries and the size of the estate affected any entitlement to provision.' "Whether the Plaintiff's failure to disclose litigation and a bank account affected her claim."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff's claim was dismissed because she failed to make full and frank disclosure of her financial and material circumstances, including current Supreme Court of Victoria litigation and an ANZ Bank account; she did not establish any relevant present need for provision; and, in any event, she did not establish factors warranting the making of the application under section 9(1) of the Family Provision Act 1982. The small estate and the strong competing claims of beneficiaries Suzanne and Sandra further weighed against any provision.

Court Disposition

The claim of the First Plaintiff Natalie Veronica Thyssen was dismissed.

Orders

  • ['I order that the claim of the Plaintiff Natalie Veronica Thyssen be dismissed.' 'I order that the Plaintiff pay the costs of the Defendant, such costs to be on the party and party basis.' 'I order that the Defendant be entitled to recoup from the estate of the late Nicolaas Jacob Marker ("the Deceased") the...