Pollock v New South Wales Trustee & Guardian [2022] NSWSC 923

Pollock v New South Wales Trustee & Guardian [2022] NSWSC 923

On all the evidence, the plaintiff was a person with whom the deceased was living in a de facto relationship at the time of death; the relationship persisted despite periods of difficulty, as demonstrated by shared residence, financial interdependence, mutual support, and public aspects of the relationship. The plaintiff received no provision under the will, and given her age, needs, and limited financial resources (and the large size of the estate), it is inadequate and improper to make no provision. A lump sum of $850,000 is adequate and proper to discharge her debts and provide a fund for future maintenance and advancement in life, with the balance of the estate sufficient to satisfy...

Parties
Plaintiff: Christine Winifred Pollock; Defendant: NSW Trustee & Guardian
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Family Provision / Succession (equity) / Principal Judgment (final Determination—orders for Provision to Be Settled Pending Costs Argument)
Outcome
Plaintiff successful; appropriate provision to be made for the plaintiff; costs stood over.
Legal Topics
Family Provision, De Facto Relationships, Eligible Persons (succession Act), Interpretation of De Facto Status, Estate Distribution, Testamentary Provision, Meaning of Proper Provision, Rebuttal of Testamentary Disposition
Succession Law Equity Family Provision De Facto Relationships Eligible Persons (succession Act) Interpretation of De Facto Status Estate Distribution Testamentary Provision +2 more

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 4 Authorities cited 70 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christine Winifred Pollock

Plaintiff

NSW Trustee & Guardian

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Family Provision / Succession (equity) / Principal Judgment (final Determination—orders for Provision to Be Settled Pending Costs Argument)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff was living in a de facto relationship with the deceased at the time of his death and is thus an 'eligible person' under s 57(1)(b) of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether adequate provision was made for the plaintiff from the deceased's estate
  3. 3 Appropriate provision (if any) to be made from the estate for the plaintiff's maintenance or advancement in life

Ratio Decidendi

On all the evidence, the plaintiff was a person with whom the deceased was living in a de facto relationship at the time of death; the relationship persisted despite periods of difficulty, as demonstrated by shared residence, financial interdependence, mutual support, and public aspects of the relationship. The plaintiff received no provision under the will, and given her age, needs, and limited financial resources (and the large size of the estate), it is inadequate and improper to make no provision. A lump sum of $850,000 is adequate and proper to discharge her debts and provide a fund for future maintenance and advancement in life, with the balance of the estate sufficient to satisfy...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff successful; appropriate provision to be made for the plaintiff; costs stood over.

Orders

  • Direct the parties, within ten days, to provide Short Minutes of Order reflecting these reasons.
  • Proceedings stood over for directions at 9:00 a.m. on Thursday, 28 July 2022 to determine costs.