Did the man’s nephew deserve a share of his estate? Which case won?
Man emigrates to Australia from Hong Kong and sets up successful businesses
A man emigrated to Australia from Hong Kong in 1941, when he was in his late teens.
He established himself in Sydney, married, adopted two children and, due to his hardworking nature and business acumen, went on to establish a number of successful businesses.
Man helps numerous relatives emigrate to Australia
As the senior member of the family in Australia, the man took his family responsibilities very seriously. Over the course of many years, he arranged for over a dozen members of his extended family and his wife’s extended family to emigrate to Australia.
These relatives were provided with a landing point and a safe haven in Australia. Several of them lived with the man and his wife for a number of years.
The man generously provided financial assistance to these relatives and otherwise helped them by employing them within his businesses.
Seven wills made during the course of a lifetime
The man had made seven wills in his life. In the final will he made provision for his two adopted children, his second wife and her daughter.
No provision was made in any of the man’s wills for any of the extended family members whom he had helped to emigrate to Australia.
Nephew makes family provision claim following man’s death
When the man died in 2013 at the age of 89, one of these extended family members, a nephew, sought to challenge the will and made an application to the Supreme Court of NSW, seeking orders that provision also be made for him under the will.
This application was opposed by the man’s son and brother, who were the executors of the estate.
In NSW, the law allows a person to make a family provision application if they are an “eligible person”, if there are factors which warrant the making of the application and if it can be shown that adequate provision for the person has not been made in the will.
Both sides agreed that the nephew was an “eligible person” and that no provision had been made for him in the will, so it was for the court to determine whether there were factors warranting an order for provision being made in favour of the nephew.