Stone v Stone [2016] NSWSC 605

Stone v Stone [2016] NSWSC 605

The plaintiff was entitled to extension of time for making the claim as the delay was caused by reliance on the defendant's representation. The deceased failed in his moral and legal obligation to provide proper maintenance for his daughter, and despite the primary claim of the widow, the plaintiff's need and deprivation justified making a family provision order. Special circumstances justified designating distributed property as notional estate and making orders both for extension of time and provision for the plaintiff.

Parties
Plaintiff: Bettina Stone; Defendant: Estelle Beryl Stone
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Family Provision Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Extension of time granted; family provision order and designating order made in plaintiff's favour.
Legal Topics
Family Provision, Testator's Family Maintenance, Extension of Time, Notional Estate, Special Circumstances
Succession Law Equity Family Provision Testator's Family Maintenance Extension of Time Notional Estate Special Circumstances

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 5 Authorities cited 54 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bettina Stone

Plaintiff

Estelle Beryl Stone

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Family Provision Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether time for making a family provision claim should be extended beyond the statutory limitation period
  2. 2 Whether the deceased failed in his testamentary and moral duty to provide adequately for the plaintiff
  3. 3 Whether a family provision order should be made in favour of the plaintiff, and its form

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff was entitled to extension of time for making the claim as the delay was caused by reliance on the defendant's representation. The deceased failed in his moral and legal obligation to provide proper maintenance for his daughter, and despite the primary claim of the widow, the plaintiff's need and deprivation justified making a family provision order. Special circumstances justified designating distributed property as notional estate and making orders both for extension of time and provision for the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted; family provision order and designating order made in plaintiff's favour.

Orders

  • Time for the plaintiff to apply for a family provision order is extended up to the filing date of the summons.
  • One-half share in the Vaucluse property is designated as notional estate of the deceased.