Martin v Brustolin [2004] NSWSC 1028

Martin v Brustolin [2004] NSWSC 1028

Although the plaintiff was a de facto partner between approximately 1978-1986 and later had a close relationship, she was not living with the deceased at his death and received a substantial ex gratia payment from the estate. Considering the nature, duration and extent of financial support in the relationship, and after weighing the plaintiff's circumstances and needs against provision already made and the size of the estate, no further provision beyond what has been paid is appropriate.

Parties
Plaintiff: Ester Martin; Defendant: Guiseppe Brustolin
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 November 2004
Procedural Posture
Family Provision Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
No further provision ordered; payment of $105,000.00 to plaintiff is appropriate.
Legal Topics
Family Provision, De Facto Relationships, Eligibility Under Family Provision Act 1982 (nsw)
Equity Succession Law Family Provision De Facto Relationships Eligibility Under Family Provision Act 1982 (nsw)

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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ester Martin

Plaintiff

Guiseppe Brustolin

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Family Provision Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is an eligible person under the Family Provision Act 1982 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether adequate provision was made for the plaintiff's proper maintenance, education and advancement in life
  3. 3 Criteria for de facto and close personal relationships under the Property (Relationships) Act 1984 (NSW)

Ratio Decidendi

Although the plaintiff was a de facto partner between approximately 1978-1986 and later had a close relationship, she was not living with the deceased at his death and received a substantial ex gratia payment from the estate. Considering the nature, duration and extent of financial support in the relationship, and after weighing the plaintiff's circumstances and needs against provision already made and the size of the estate, no further provision beyond what has been paid is appropriate.

Court Disposition

No further provision ordered; payment of $105,000.00 to plaintiff is appropriate.