Tsecouras v Price [2006] NSWSC 701

Tsecouras v Price [2006] NSWSC 701

The plaintiff was not an eligible person. The court did not accept his evidence that he had a sexual or de facto relationship with the deceased, found that he had been a paying boarder between 1958 or 1960 and 1975, and found no public aspect, mutual commitment, financial interdependence, joint property, close personal relationship, household membership with dependency, or evidence of inadequate provision.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Application Under the Family Provision Act in Respect of the Estate of Diana Rosemary Keefe / Final Judgment
Outcome
Proceedings dismissed.
Legal Topics
['de Facto Relationship' 'close Personal Relationship' 'eligible Person' 'member of Household' 'dependency' 'adequate Provision From Estate']
['succession' 'family Provision' 'equity'] ['de Facto Relationship' 'close Personal Relationship' 'eligible Person' 'member of Household' 'dependency' 'adequate Provision From Estate']

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
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application Under the Family Provision Act in Respect of the Estate of Diana Rosemary Keefe / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff was an eligible person as the deceased's de facto partner at the date of death." 'Whether the plaintiff was in a close personal relationship with the deceased at the date of death.' "Whether the plaintiff had been a member of the deceased's household and partly dependent upon her." 'Whether the plaintiff had shown that he was left without adequate provision for his education, maintenance and advancement in life.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff was not an eligible person. The court did not accept his evidence that he had a sexual or de facto relationship with the deceased, found that he had been a paying boarder between 1958 or 1960 and 1975, and found no public aspect, mutual commitment, financial interdependence, joint property, close personal relationship, household membership with dependency, or evidence of inadequate provision.

Court Disposition

Proceedings dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The proceedings are dismissed.' "The plaintiff is to pay the defendant's costs." 'The exhibits are to be returned.']