Frank v Angell [2024] NSWCA 264

Frank v Angell [2024] NSWCA 264

The appellants were not natural objects of testamentary recognition by the deceased and there was no moral duty to make further provision for them. The deceased's support was purpose-specific and limited, provision made in the will was more than sufficient, and the findings of the primary judge disclosed no error. The standard of appellate review was correctly applied and no appealable error was established.

Parties
Appellant: Sharon Frank; Appellant: Kim Hagie; Respondent: Catherine Angell; Respondent: Joanne Loughlin
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment Following Full Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Family Provision, Appeals, Testamentary Provision, Appellate Review Standard, Eligibility Under Succession Act
Succession Law Civil Procedure Family Provision Appeals Testamentary Provision Appellate Review Standard Eligibility Under Succession Act

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 29 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sharon Frank

Appellant

Kim Hagie

Appellant

Catherine Angell

Respondent

Joanne Loughlin

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment Following Full Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants were eligible persons under s 57 of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether there were factors warranting the making of the application for family provision under s 59(1)(b)
  3. 3 Whether adequate provision was made for proper maintenance, education or advancement under s 59(1)(c)

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants were not natural objects of testamentary recognition by the deceased and there was no moral duty to make further provision for them. The deceased's support was purpose-specific and limited, provision made in the will was more than sufficient, and the findings of the primary judge disclosed no error. The standard of appellate review was correctly applied and no appealable error was established.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • To the extent necessary leave to appeal is granted.
  • The appeal is dismissed.