Durham v Durham [2010] NSWSC 389
An extension of time should not be granted because it would cause serious prejudice to the other beneficiaries, and even if an extension were granted, the plaintiff has not been left without adequate provision for his proper maintenance, education and advancement in life, taking into account the size of the estate, his relationship with the deceased, benefits conferred and the relative positions of all beneficiaries. Thus, the proceedings must be dismissed.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 05 May 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Family Provision Succession / Judgment on Extension of Time and Substantive Application
- Outcome
- Proceedings dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- ['family Provision' 'extension of Time' "testator's Family Maintenance"]
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Family Provision Succession / Judgment on Extension of Time and Substantive Application
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether extension of time to apply should be granted under s16 Family Provision Act 1982' 'Whether plaintiff has been left without adequate provision for proper maintenance, education and advancement in life']
Ratio Decidendi
An extension of time should not be granted because it would cause serious prejudice to the other beneficiaries, and even if an extension were granted, the plaintiff has not been left without adequate provision for his proper maintenance, education and advancement in life, taking into account the size of the estate, his relationship with the deceased, benefits conferred and the relative positions of all beneficiaries. Thus, the proceedings must be dismissed.
Court Disposition
Proceedings dismissed.
Orders
- ['Proceedings dismissed.' 'Costs of the parties be paid out of the Estate.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment