In Allan v Dobbins a District Court decision dated 4.10.2024 a 65-year-old son (Noel) was unsuccessful in his application for better and further provision under his father’s will claiming that his gift of $50 was inadequate from an estate of 1.1 million. Read the below article to find out how the court reached a decision on the challenge to the will.
The father’s will specifically stated that he had declined to make any further provision for Noel because he felt he had given enough to Noel in his lifetime and particularly because of the protracted and expensive legal proceedings between them when their partnership was dissolved.
The Court accepted Noel had advanced a case which proved that he was in need of financial support including that he had health issues which probably affected his ability to work; he only had assets of about $174,000 after his property settlement with his ex-wife; he claimed that his business turnover had markedly deteriorated although as proper records were not kept the court found it difficult to be sure about this; and finally each of the three siblings who received the bulk of their father’s estate where in a significantly superior financial position to Noel.
So how did Noel lose the case from here?
The Court pointed out that just because Noel could establish his financial need, that is not the determinative factor. The court looked at the entire relationship between Noel and his father and noted that the deceased was better placed to determine if Noel’s moral claim had been reduced by:
- The long period of estrangement between Noel and his father (i.e. more than 10 years)
- The threat by Noel to shoot him (which the deceased took seriously, and he was frightened by)
- The work that Noel performed on his father’s farm in later years had a suspiciously exploitive look about it.
The Court agreed the father was correct, Noel had received financial benefits from him during his lifetime. This included during the partnership years when $100,000 was given to Noel who used it to buy 2 houses and some farmland and when the partnership dispute was resolved in 2001 when Noel received farmland valued at $380,000 plus plant and equipment. In the circumstances Noel had failed to show adequate provision for his proper maintenance and support had not been made.
If you’re facing a will dispute, or want to ensure your estate planning reflects your wishes and protects your family, our experienced estate law team is here to guide you. Contact us today for expert advice tailored to your situation.
