Scalone v Scalone [2000] NSWSC 1028

Scalone v Scalone [2000] NSWSC 1028

The Plaintiff failed to demonstrate any relevant need which would entitle him to an order for provision out of the estate. Moreover, any provision to the Plaintiff would unjustly reduce the benefit to infant beneficiaries and other branches of the deceased’s issue, contrary to the intent of the will and the principles of the Family Provision Act.

Parties
Plaintiff: Anthony Scalone; Defendant: Peter Neil Scalone
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 November 2000
Procedural Posture
Family Provision Claim / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Family Provision, Testamentary Bounty, Eligible Persons, Competing Claims of Beneficiaries
Succession Law Family Provision Testamentary Bounty Eligible Persons Competing Claims of Beneficiaries

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 28
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony Scalone

Plaintiff

Peter Neil Scalone

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Family Provision Claim / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff has demonstrated a relevant need to justify an order for provision from the deceased’s estate
  2. 2 Whether competing claims of other beneficiaries outweigh the claim of the Plaintiff

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff failed to demonstrate any relevant need which would entitle him to an order for provision out of the estate. Moreover, any provision to the Plaintiff would unjustly reduce the benefit to infant beneficiaries and other branches of the deceased’s issue, contrary to the intent of the will and the principles of the Family Provision Act.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed

Orders

  • The summons is dismissed.
  • The Plaintiff to pay the Defendant’s costs on a party and party basis.