ZUKERMAN and ANOR v ZUKERMAN [1996] NSWCA 578

ZUKERMAN and ANOR v ZUKERMAN [1996] NSWCA 578

The court held that the respondent had not been left with adequate provision for his maintenance and advancement given his serious medical condition and need for urgent and speculative overseas treatment; the Master had correctly exercised discretion in making an interim provision of $200,000, despite the speculative prospects of medical success. The form and amount of the order was justified in the circumstances, and the appeal should be dismissed save to clarify that the order was interim and the claim stood adjourned for future application if further provision became necessary.

Parties
Appellant: Max Zukerman; Appellant: Phillip Wiseman; Respondent: Gregory Zukerman
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 March 1996
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment (decision on Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed (majority); order varied to clarify interim nature; costs out of estate.
Legal Topics
Testators Family Maintenance, Provision for Adult Child, Costs of Medical Treatment, Form of Orders Under Family Provision Act
Succession Law Family Provision Testators Family Maintenance Provision for Adult Child Costs of Medical Treatment Form of Orders Under Family Provision Act

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Max Zukerman

Appellant

Phillip Wiseman

Appellant

Gregory Zukerman

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment (decision on Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether adequate provision was made for the respondent out of the deceased's estate for his proper maintenance, education and advancement
  2. 2 Whether the quantum and form of the order for provision (lump sum, interim order, staged payments) was appropriate, having regard to respondent's medical condition and prospects
  3. 3 Whether the Master erred in the evaluation of the respondent's needs, assets, or entitlement to income from the estate and trust

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the respondent had not been left with adequate provision for his maintenance and advancement given his serious medical condition and need for urgent and speculative overseas treatment; the Master had correctly exercised discretion in making an interim provision of $200,000, despite the speculative prospects of medical success. The form and amount of the order was justified in the circumstances, and the appeal should be dismissed save to clarify that the order was interim and the claim stood adjourned for future application if further provision became necessary.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed (majority); order varied to clarify interim nature; costs out of estate.

Orders

  • Orders of Master Macready set aside; in lieu, interim provision of $200,000 to respondent under s7/s9(5) Family Provision Act 1982 (NSW)
  • Balance of respondent's application adjourned generally