Michael Edward Norris v Public Trustee of New South Wales & Anor [2008] NSWSC 179

Michael Edward Norris v Public Trustee of New South Wales & Anor [2008] NSWSC 179

The plaintiff did not establish a need for provision given his financial position and circumstances. The second defendant had a reasonable expectation to succeed to the Birrong property, and the size of the estate was not sufficient to justify provision to the plaintiff. The plaintiff failed to satisfy the requisite threshold for provision under the Act.

Parties
Plaintiff: Michael Edward Norris; First Defendant: Public Trustee of New South Wales; Second Defendant: Shirley Carolyn Norris-Bungate
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Family Provision Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Family Provision Act 1982 (nsw), Estate Provision, Maintenance and Advancement, Notional Estate
Succession Law Family Provision Act 1982 (nsw) Estate Provision Maintenance and Advancement Notional 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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 25
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Edward Norris

Plaintiff

Public Trustee of New South Wales

First Defendant

Shirley Carolyn Norris-Bungate

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Family Provision Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to provision under the Family Provision Act 1982 (NSW) out of the estate or notional estate of the deceased

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff did not establish a need for provision given his financial position and circumstances. The second defendant had a reasonable expectation to succeed to the Birrong property, and the size of the estate was not sufficient to justify provision to the plaintiff. The plaintiff failed to satisfy the requisite threshold for provision under the Act.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The claim to provision is dismissed.