Keep v Packham [2012] NSWSC 782

Keep v Packham [2012] NSWSC 782

The Court determined that the disadvantages of not making orders in terms of the amended Short Minutes of Order outweighed any advantages and that the proposed orders represented a fair compromise of the family provision claim. Orders should be made accordingly, and the release of further rights by Paul Robert Keep should be approved.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Family Provision Claim / Final Determination With Orders Following Consent Agreement
Outcome
Orders made in accordance with paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 of the amended Short Minutes of Order. Issue of Defendant's costs to be determined separately.
Legal Topics
['family Provision' 'consent Orders' 'compromise of Family Provision Claim' 'release of Rights to Further Claim']
['succession' 'equity'] ['family Provision' 'consent Orders' 'compromise of Family Provision Claim' 'release of Rights to Further Claim']

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

Family Provision Claim / Final Determination With Orders Following Consent Agreement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should make orders in terms of the amended Short Minutes of Order despite opposition from a residuary beneficiary' 'Whether the consent order and compromise reached are fair and should be approved' 'Whether the release of further rights to claim family provision should be approved']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court determined that the disadvantages of not making orders in terms of the amended Short Minutes of Order outweighed any advantages and that the proposed orders represented a fair compromise of the family provision claim. Orders should be made accordingly, and the release of further rights by Paul Robert Keep should be approved.

Court Disposition

Orders made in accordance with paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 of the amended Short Minutes of Order. Issue of Defendant's costs to be determined separately.

Orders

  • ['Provision for Paul Robert Keep of $35,000 by Janette Packham in satisfaction of condition in revised clause 5;' 'Plaintiff’s rights to apply for further family provision order released and court approval granted;' 'Defendant’s costs to be paid out of the estate on an indemnity basis (subject to further...