Sadiq v NSW Trustee and Guardian [2016] NSWCA 62

Sadiq v NSW Trustee and Guardian [2016] NSWCA 62

The appellant did not establish any appellable error. The primary judge was entitled to prefer the evidence of neighbours and social workers, to rely on the paucity of documentary evidence and inconsistencies in the appellant's case, and to conclude that the appellant was not living with the deceased as a de facto partner and was not eligible for the succession or family provision relief claimed. The appeal was therefore dismissed with costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Succession Appeal Concerning Intestacy and Alleged De Facto Relationship / Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales, Equity Division, [2015] NSWSC 716
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['intestacy' 'de Facto Partner' 'family Provision' 'appellable Error' 'assessment of Evidence']
['succession Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['intestacy' 'de Facto Partner' 'family Provision' 'appellable Error' 'assessment of Evidence']

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

Succession Appeal Concerning Intestacy and Alleged De Facto Relationship / Appeal From Supreme Court of New South Wales, Equity Division, [2015] NSWSC 716

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the appellant established appellable error in the primary judge's finding that he was not the deceased's de facto partner at the time of death." "Whether the appellant was entitled to the whole of the deceased's intestate estate pursuant to s 111 of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW)." 'Whether the appellant was eligible for a family provision order under Ch 3 of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant did not establish any appellable error. The primary judge was entitled to prefer the evidence of neighbours and social workers, to rely on the paucity of documentary evidence and inconsistencies in the appellant's case, and to conclude that the appellant was not living with the deceased as a de facto partner and was not eligible for the succession or family provision relief claimed. The appeal was therefore dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.']