Steiner v Strang [2017] NSWSC 132

Steiner v Strang [2017] NSWSC 132

The application failed because the Court was not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that John would obtain a family provision order at the final hearing, or that any final order would be no less than $500,000. John had received substantial lifetime gifts and a $2,000,000 legacy, the unresolved Alleged Loan created significant uncertainty about his entitlement, and the proposed security over the Strand unit was inadequate. For the further interim distribution claim, a conservative analysis showed the executors could not safely part with $500,000 without risking overpayment and diminishing the pool available for other legacies.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Interim Family Provision or Further Interim Distribution From Deceased Estate / Interlocutory Notice of Motion Filed 10 March 2016
Outcome
Application for interim provision or further interim distribution dismissed.
Legal Topics
['interim Family Provision' 'interim Distribution of Pecuniary Legacy' 'family Provision Claim by Adult Child' 'executor Administration' 'security for Repayment' 'adequacy of Testamentary Provision']
['wills, Probate and Administration' 'succession' 'equity'] ['interim Family Provision' 'interim Distribution of Pecuniary Legacy' 'family Provision Claim by Adult Child' 'executor Administration' 'security for Repayment' 'adequacy of Testamentary Provision']

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 for Interim Family Provision or Further Interim Distribution From Deceased Estate / Interlocutory Notice of Motion Filed 10 March 2016

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should make an interim family provision order of $500,000 under s 62(1) of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW).' "Whether the Court should order a further interim distribution of $500,000 from John's pecuniary legacy under s 84 of the Probate and Administration Act 1898 (NSW) and related rules." "Whether the Court could be satisfied that no less than $500,000 would be made in John's favour at the final hearing." 'Whether the executors could safely part with $500,000 having regard to estate liabilities, possible abatement of pecuniary legacies, and the unresolved Alleged Loan.' "Whether John's proposed security over the Strand unit was adequate."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application failed because the Court was not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that John would obtain a family provision order at the final hearing, or that any final order would be no less than $500,000. John had received substantial lifetime gifts and a $2,000,000 legacy, the unresolved Alleged Loan created significant uncertainty about his entitlement, and the proposed security over the Strand unit was inadequate. For the further interim distribution claim, a conservative analysis showed the executors could not safely part with $500,000 without risking overpayment and diminishing the pool available for other legacies.

Court Disposition

Application for interim provision or further interim distribution dismissed.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff's motion filed on 10 March 2016 is dismissed." 'The Court will hear the parties as to costs and any consequential orders, including orders concerning preparation of the proceedings for hearing in May 2017.']