Cantrell v Williams [2004] NSWSC 579
The court ordered that the burden be borne solely by the stepchildren because, although discounted, the submission that the will focused on benefaction of the children had some weight; there was evidence of some needs by the children and none for the stepchildren; the children appeared closer to the deceased in his last years; no submissions were made for the stepchildren; and the result was more likely than not to accord with the testator's wishes.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 28 June 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Family Provision Act Proceedings Concerning the Estate of Thomas Brindle / Judgment on Compromised Proceedings and Orders Under S 13 of the Family Provision Act 1982
- Outcome
- Orders made.
- Legal Topics
- ['burden of Family Provision Orders' 'distribution of Estate' "testator's Likely Wishes" 'provision for De Facto Wife, Children and Stepchildren']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Family Provision Act Proceedings Concerning the Estate of Thomas Brindle / Judgment on Compromised Proceedings and Orders Under S 13 of the Family Provision Act 1982
Legal Issues
- 1 ['How the burden of the family provision orders should be borne under s 13 of the Family Provision Act 1982.' 'Whether the burden should be borne solely by the stepchildren.']
Ratio Decidendi
The court ordered that the burden be borne solely by the stepchildren because, although discounted, the submission that the will focused on benefaction of the children had some weight; there was evidence of some needs by the children and none for the stepchildren; the children appeared closer to the deceased in his last years; no submissions were made for the stepchildren; and the result was more likely than not to accord with the testator's wishes.
Court Disposition
Orders made.
Orders
- ['Orders 1 to 7 in the short minutes of order made.']
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