Stokes v Stokes [2023] NSWSC 1223

Adequate provision had not been made for the plaintiff by operation of intestacy; taking into account her immediate needs, modest allowance for contingencies, the size of the estate, and paramount claims of the widow and infant son, a family provision order of $100,000 was appropriate.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 16 October 2023
Procedural Posture: Family Provision Claim / Principal Judgment
Outcome: Family provision order granted in favour of the plaintiff
Legal Topics: ['family Provision' 'intestacy' 'adequate Provision' 'adult Child Claims' 'testamentary Intentions']

['succession Law' 'equity'] ['family Provision' 'intestacy' 'adequate Provision' 'adult Child Claims' 'testamentary Intentions']

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

Procedural Posture

Family Provision Claim / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

1 ["Whether adequate provision has been made for the plaintiff's proper maintenance, education or advancement in life under the intestacy rules" 'Quantum of family provision order to be made in favour of the plaintiff']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Family provision order granted in favour of the plaintiff

Orders

["Administration of the estate granted to Kayla Lee Stokes for purpose of plaintiff's application (s 91 Succession Act 2006)" 'Kayla Lee Stokes appointed to represent the estate for proceedings (r 7.10 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005)' 'Plaintiff to receive a lump sum of $100,000 out of the estate in lieu of...