Paul Sikorski v Richard John Michalowski and Anor [2007] NSWSC 666

Paul Sikorski v Richard John Michalowski and Anor [2007] NSWSC 666

Plaintiff, as the only eligible person, has not been left with adequate provision for his proper maintenance. The lack of contact with the deceased did not amount to conduct disentitling. The proceedings, although out of time, were permitted given plaintiff's lack of awareness of death. Property held by First Defendant as a result of distribution from the estate should be designated as notional estate to the extent of $100,000, reflecting modest provision for plaintiff and accounting for substantial justice and the conduct of the defendants.

Parties
Plaintiff: Paul Sikorski; First Defendant: Richard John Michalowski; Second Defendant: Maria Delores Michalowski
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Succession, Family Provision / Judgment at First Instance
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for provision allowed; extension of time granted; property of First Defendant to be designated as notional estate to extent of $100,000; costs to be paid by First Defendant; matter stood over for short minutes and costs submissions.
Legal Topics
Adequate Provision, Notional Estate, Extension of Time, Conduct Disentitling, Competing Claim, Distribution of Estate
Succession Family Provision Adequate Provision Notional Estate Extension of Time Conduct Disentitling Competing Claim Distribution of 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 15
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Sikorski

Plaintiff

Richard John Michalowski

First Defendant

Maria Delores Michalowski

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Succession, Family Provision / Judgment at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff, an eligible person, has been left without adequate provision for his proper maintenance
  2. 2 Whether there has been conduct disentitling the plaintiff
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings instituted out of time should be permitted

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff, as the only eligible person, has not been left with adequate provision for his proper maintenance. The lack of contact with the deceased did not amount to conduct disentitling. The proceedings, although out of time, were permitted given plaintiff's lack of awareness of death. Property held by First Defendant as a result of distribution from the estate should be designated as notional estate to the extent of $100,000, reflecting modest provision for plaintiff and accounting for substantial justice and the conduct of the defendants.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim for provision allowed; extension of time granted; property of First Defendant to be designated as notional estate to extent of $100,000; costs to be paid by First Defendant; matter stood over for short minutes and costs submissions.

Orders

  • Matter stood over for bringing in short minutes of order to reflect conclusions and for argument as to costs.
  • First Defendant to pay costs of Plaintiff.