Bardi v Giannaros

The case of Bardi v Giannaros involves a family provision claim by the plaintiff, who asserts they were in a de facto relationship with the deceased at the time of his death, against the defendant, who is the executrix and widow of the deceased. The dispute primarily revolves around the plaintiff's eligibility for family provision under the Succession Act and the defendant's request for security for costs given the plaintiff's residence in Greece. The court was tasked with determining the eligibility of the plaintiff under section 57(1) of the Succession Act, the appropriateness of the defendant's request for security for costs, and the proper approach to costs in the context of family provision claims.

The court examined whether the plaintiff was eligible for family provision under the Act, focusing on the interpretation of dependency and membership of the same household. It was established that the facts giving rise to dependency do not need to coincide with those establishing membership of the household. Additionally, the court evaluated whether the plaintiff and the deceased were in a de facto relationship and members of the same household, even if they did not own the property they were living in. The court also considered the implications of the so-called “bare satisfaction of eligibility criteria” on the provision amount, clarifying that such criteria do not necessarily dictate a low level of provision.

In reaching its decision, the court found that the plaintiff was eligible for family provision under the Succession Act, as they were in a de facto relationship with the deceased and members of the same household. The court dismissed the defendant's application for security for costs, noting the contestable nature of the factual and legal propositions presented. Regarding costs, the court held that the financial circumstances of the plaintiff, though relevant, were not necessarily decisive in determining an appropriate costs order. The court also discussed the enforceability of an Australian court judgment in Greece and the potential means of enforcing such a judgment.

The final orders of the court were that the plaintiff was eligible for family provision, the application for security for costs was dismissed, and costs were to be determined separately. The court provided guidance on the preparation of joint schedules, the relevance of certain documents in non-inspection applications, and the applicability of probate cost exceptions to family provision claims.