Carey v Robson [2010] NSWCA 212
The primary judge did not make a material error nor disregard relevant matters in concluding that the provision to the appellant was adequate for her proper maintenance and advancement in life. The appellant, an adult child in good health, with gainful employment and reasonable financial circumstances, was not entitled to further provision despite unequal distribution of the estate, given the respondent's significant contributions and needs.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 19 August 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['family Provision' "testator's Discretion" 'adequate Provision' 'adult Children Claims' 'disproportionate Gifts']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the primary judge erred in finding that the appellant had not been left without adequate provision for her proper maintenance and advancement' 'Whether unequal and allegedly disproportionate gifts to children justified further provision' 'Whether primary judge failed to consider all relevant financial circumstances']
Ratio Decidendi
The primary judge did not make a material error nor disregard relevant matters in concluding that the provision to the appellant was adequate for her proper maintenance and advancement in life. The appellant, an adult child in good health, with gainful employment and reasonable financial circumstances, was not entitled to further provision despite unequal distribution of the estate, given the respondent's significant contributions and needs.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- ['Appeal dismissed with costs.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment