Davis v Jarrett [2005] NSWSC 90

Davis v Jarrett [2005] NSWSC 90

The Plaintiff had been left without adequate provision for her proper maintenance because the benefit of about $30,000 under the will was insufficient to provide a fund for necessary continuing maintenance of her residence, alterations needed to accommodate her husband's mobility problems, and unforeseen contingencies. An additional legacy of $50,000 was appropriate, but it should be borne by the interests of the deceased's grandchildren other than the Defendant so that the Defendant's entitlement under the will was not disturbed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 February 2005
Procedural Posture
Proceedings Under the Family Provision Act 1982 for Provision Out of the Estate And/or Notional Estate of Winifred Hazel Jarrett / Final Judgment and Orders
Outcome
Plaintiff awarded an additional legacy of $50,000 from the estate; Defendant's interest under the will not affected; costs ordered from residue.
Legal Topics
['family Provision' 'adult Child Claim' 'adequate Provision for Proper Maintenance' 'ademption of Specific Gift' 'competing Claims of Beneficiaries' 'costs From Estate']
['succession' 'equity'] ['family Provision' 'adult Child Claim' 'adequate Provision for Proper Maintenance' 'ademption of Specific Gift' 'competing Claims of Beneficiaries' 'costs 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

Proceedings Under the Family Provision Act 1982 for Provision Out of the Estate And/or Notional Estate of Winifred Hazel Jarrett / Final Judgment and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Plaintiff, as the deceased's adult daughter and only eligible person, had been left without adequate provision for her proper maintenance." "Whether the Plaintiff's needs could practically include the needs arising from her husband's poor health and mobility limitations where she was effectively his primary carer." 'What provision, if any, should be made for the Plaintiff having regard to the estate and the competing claims of the grandchildren beneficiaries.' "Whether any additional provision for the Plaintiff should affect the Defendant's entitlement under the will."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff had been left without adequate provision for her proper maintenance because the benefit of about $30,000 under the will was insufficient to provide a fund for necessary continuing maintenance of her residence, alterations needed to accommodate her husband's mobility problems, and unforeseen contingencies. An additional legacy of $50,000 was appropriate, but it should be borne by the interests of the deceased's grandchildren other than the Defendant so that the Defendant's entitlement under the will was not disturbed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff awarded an additional legacy of $50,000 from the estate; Defendant's interest under the will not affected; costs ordered from residue.

Orders

  • ['I order that, in addition to the benefit given to her by the will of the late Winifred Hazel Jarrett ("the Deceased"), the Plaintiff receive a legacy in the sum of $50,000, such legacy not to bear interest if paid on or before 8 March 2005, and if not so paid to bear interest at the rates prescribed for unpaid...