Kent-Biggs v ANZ Executors & Trustee Company Limited [1999] NSWSC 730

Kent-Biggs v ANZ Executors & Trustee Company Limited [1999] NSWSC 730

The plaintiff was an eligible person because, during the New Guinea years after the deceased married her father, she was a member of the same household as the deceased and was partly dependent upon her, including financially for clothing and emotionally. Factors warranted the application because the plaintiff received no benefit from her father's estate, which passed to the deceased, and the deceased was for practical purposes the plaintiff's only family in Australia. Given the plaintiff's secure employment and income, she was not entitled to enough to buy a residence, but provision of $100,000 was appropriate to assist her, and the University of Sydney's competing charitable claim did...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 July 1999
Procedural Posture
Proceedings Under the Family Provision Act 1982 / Judgment After Hearing of the Plaintiff's Summons for Provision Out of the Estate of the Late Donna Kent Biggs
Outcome
The plaintiff was awarded a legacy of $100,000 out of the estate of the late Donna Kent-Biggs, with costs orders made from the estate.
Legal Topics
['family Provision' 'eligible Person' 'dependency' 'member of Household' 'stepchild' 'provision From Deceased Estate' 'competing Charitable Beneficiary']
['succession' 'equity'] ['family Provision' 'eligible Person' 'dependency' 'member of Household' 'stepchild' 'provision From Deceased Estate' 'competing Charitable Beneficiary']

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

Proceedings Under the Family Provision Act 1982 / Judgment After Hearing of the Plaintiff's Summons for Provision Out of the Estate of the Late Donna Kent Biggs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff was an eligible person within paragraph (d) of the definition in section 6(1) of the Family Provision Act 1982.' 'Whether the plaintiff was, at any relevant time, a member of a household of which the deceased was a member.' 'Whether the plaintiff was wholly or partly dependent upon the deceased.' 'Whether factors warranted the making of the application under section 9(1) of the Family Provision Act 1982.' 'Whether provision should be made for the plaintiff from the estate and, if so, in what amount, having regard to her circumstances and the competing claim of the University of Sydney.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff was an eligible person because, during the New Guinea years after the deceased married her father, she was a member of the same household as the deceased and was partly dependent upon her, including financially for clothing and emotionally. Factors warranted the application because the plaintiff received no benefit from her father's estate, which passed to the deceased, and the deceased was for practical purposes the plaintiff's only family in Australia. Given the plaintiff's secure employment and income, she was not entitled to enough to buy a residence, but provision of $100,000 was appropriate to assist her, and the University of Sydney's competing charitable claim did...

Court Disposition

The plaintiff was awarded a legacy of $100,000 out of the estate of the late Donna Kent-Biggs, with costs orders made from the estate.

Orders

  • ['The plaintiff receive out of the estate of the late Donna Kent-Biggs a legacy in the sum of $100,000, such legacy not to bear interest if paid on or before 12 August 1999, and if not so paid, to bear interest at Supreme Court rates.' 'The costs of the plaintiff on the party and party basis and the costs of the...