Ovens v Ovens; The Estate of the late May Enid Ovens [2020] NSWSC 568
The plaintiff failed to establish that the Will left him without adequate provision because his testamentary entitlement was sufficient to buy reasonably priced accommodation in Panama City and leave a modest fund for maintenance or a photography business. In any event, Annandale 3 would not be designated as notional estate: Penelope was joined about eight months out of time without sufficient cause for an extension; the plaintiff did not prove that the deceased transferred Annandale 3 with the intention of denying or limiting provision from her estate; and a notional estate order would interfere with Grant and Penelope's reasonable expectations arising from their ownership, renovation...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 15 May 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Family Provision Proceedings Under Succession Act 2006, Chapter 3, Including Application for Notional Estate Order / Principal Judgment After Hearing
- Outcome
- The plaintiff's claim was dismissed against both defendants. No notional estate order was made and no further provision was ordered.
- Legal Topics
- ['family Provision' 'adequate Provision for Proper Maintenance, Education or Advancement in Life' 'notional Estate' 'out of Time Application' 'special Circumstances' 'reasonable Expectations in Relation to Property' 'costs']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Family Provision Proceedings Under Succession Act 2006, Chapter 3, Including Application for Notional Estate Order / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the plaintiff had been left without adequate provision from the deceased's estate for his proper maintenance, education or advancement in life." 'Whether Annandale 3 should be designated as notional estate of the deceased.' 'Whether the notional estate application against the second defendant was out of time and whether sufficient cause was shown to extend time.' 'Whether Succession Act 2006, s 90 required proof of other special circumstances for the notional estate order.' 'Whether the deceased entered into the transfer of Annandale 3 with the intention, wholly or partly, of denying or limiting provision being made out of her estate.' "Whether a notional estate order would interfere with the first and second defendants' reasonable expectations in relation to Annandale 3." 'What costs orders should be made.']
Ratio Decidendi
The plaintiff failed to establish that the Will left him without adequate provision because his testamentary entitlement was sufficient to buy reasonably priced accommodation in Panama City and leave a modest fund for maintenance or a photography business. In any event, Annandale 3 would not be designated as notional estate: Penelope was joined about eight months out of time without sufficient cause for an extension; the plaintiff did not prove that the deceased transferred Annandale 3 with the intention of denying or limiting provision from her estate; and a notional estate order would interfere with Grant and Penelope's reasonable expectations arising from their ownership, renovation...
Court Disposition
The plaintiff's claim was dismissed against both defendants. No notional estate order was made and no further provision was ordered.
Orders
- ["The plaintiff's claim is dismissed as against both the first and second defendants." "Order that the defendants' costs, which may not be recovered in an amount exceeding the sum of $47,000, shall be paid out of the estate of the deceased, the late May Enid Ovens, on the indemnity basis." "Order that the burden...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment