KELEHEAR v SMITH [1990] NSWCA 102

KELEHEAR v SMITH [1990] NSWCA 102

The majority held that, though the will failed to make adequate provision for the appellant, the depleted estate and higher priority claims of other beneficiaries (in particular, the need to leave Lindin Smith with 'Fairview' and to meet a $35,000 legacy to Mrs Davis) meant there were insufficient assets to order further provision for Mrs Kelehear. The trial judge’s conclusions as to available assets and prior moral claims were not clearly wrong and speculative approaches to apportioning assets were inadmissible on the evidence.

Parties
Appellant: Mrs Heather Kelehear; Respondent/executor: Mr Lindin Smith; Other Applicant: Mrs Melvie Davis; Other Applicant: Mr Bruce Smith
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 October 1990
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs (by majority; Kirby P dissenting)
Legal Topics
Family Provision, Adequate Provision for Maintenance, Judicial Discretion in Family Provision, Executors' Commission
Succession Law Testators' Family Maintenance Family Provision Adequate Provision for Maintenance Judicial Discretion in Family Provision Executors' Commission

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 25
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Heather Kelehear

Appellant

Mr Lindin Smith

Respondent/executor

Mrs Melvie Davis

Other Applicant

Mr Bruce Smith

Other Applicant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the will of the deceased failed to make adequate provision for Mrs Heather Kelehear under the Testators Family Maintenance and Guardianship of Infants Act 1916, s3
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in declining to make an order for further provision in favour of Mrs Kelehear due to the estate’s size and prior claims

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that, though the will failed to make adequate provision for the appellant, the depleted estate and higher priority claims of other beneficiaries (in particular, the need to leave Lindin Smith with 'Fairview' and to meet a $35,000 legacy to Mrs Davis) meant there were insufficient assets to order further provision for Mrs Kelehear. The trial judge’s conclusions as to available assets and prior moral claims were not clearly wrong and speculative approaches to apportioning assets were inadmissible on the evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs (by majority; Kirby P dissenting)

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Appellant to pay the costs of the appeal