QUAGLIATO v LAPINSKI [1997] NSWCA 255

QUAGLIATO v LAPINSKI [1997] NSWCA 255

Although the appellant and deceased were not particularly close after the grandmother's death, the appellant's upbringing and the deceased's responsibility for her place her in the position of a child for family provision purposes. The appellant’s financial position warranted a small provision, subject to the size of the estate.

Parties
Appellant: Wanda Quagliato; Respondent: Ms Lapinski
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 October 1997
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Family Provision, Testator's Family Maintenance, Grandchild Claims, Discretion of the Court, Adequacy of Provision

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

Parties

Wanda Quagliato

Appellant

Ms Lapinski

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision

  1. 1 Whether the appellant, as a granddaughter raised by the deceased, was entitled to family provision from the estate
  2. 2 Whether the Master's order dismissing the application should stand or be set aside
  3. 3 Quantum of provision (if any) that should be made for the appellant

Ratio Decidendi

Although the appellant and deceased were not particularly close after the grandmother's death, the appellant's upbringing and the deceased's responsibility for her place her in the position of a child for family provision purposes. The appellant’s financial position warranted a small provision, subject to the size of the estate.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order below set aside
  • In lieu thereof a legacy be granted to the appellant in the sum of $10,000 with no interest if paid within 28 days