DAVID ROBERT BRANDON	Plaintiff
v
DIANA LOUISE HANLEY (who is sued in her capacity as the proving executor of the will and estate of the abovenamed deceased)	Defendant

---

JUDGE:	McMILLAN J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 18 December 2013
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	21 March 2014
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Brandon v Hanley
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2014] VSC 103

---

TESTATOR’S FAMILY MAINTENANCE – Application under Part IV of the Administration and Probate Act 1958 – Claim by adult son of the deceased – Adult son and daughter left small legacies – Remaining adult daughter left the residuary estate – Whether the deceased had a responsibility to make further provision for the adult son – Whether further provision should be made – Further provision ordered

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Plaintiff	Mr R Wells	Wainwright Ryan Eid
For the Defendant	Mr R Shepherd	The Probate Professionals

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction................................................................................................................................... 2

The value of the estate................................................................................................................. 2
The provisions of the deceased’s will........................................................................................... 3
The evidence relied on in the proceeding.................................................................................... 4

The Act............................................................................................................................................ 5

Large estates............................................................................................................................... 6
Adult children............................................................................................................................ 7
Acrimony and estrangement...................................................................................................... 9
Statements by the testator......................................................................................................... 12

The evidence................................................................................................................................ 12

The early years.......................................................................................................................... 12
The family moves to Australia.................................................................................................. 14
Discipline in the family............................................................................................................. 16
The deceased’s heart attack....................................................................................................... 19
The plaintiff leaves home........................................................................................................... 20
The defendant’s relationship with the deceased......................................................................... 22
The plaintiff’s marriage and afterwards.................................................................................... 22
The defendant’s first marriage and education........................................................................... 24
The parents’ move to Sydney.................................................................................................... 25
The death of the plaintiff’s mother and afterwards.................................................................... 27
The family relationships in the new millennium....................................................................... 33
The deceased at the Brighton Regis.......................................................................................... 39
Proceedings in the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal............................................ 41

The other witnesses.................................................................................................................... 43

The evidence of the deceased’s community care manager, Mrs Heather Butler........................ 43
The evidence of Mr William Edwards...................................................................................... 50
The evidence of Ms Sharon Martindale.................................................................................... 54
The evidence of Mrs Mary Zaarour......................................................................................... 54
The evidence of Ms Hazel Todd................................................................................................ 55
The evidence of the defendant’s husband, Mr Derek Hanley.................................................... 55

The position of the parties......................................................................................................... 56

The plaintiff’s health................................................................................................................. 56
The plaintiff’s earning capacity................................................................................................ 57
The plaintiff’s financial resources............................................................................................. 57
The defendant’s health and earning capacity............................................................................ 59
The health of the defendant’s husband...................................................................................... 60
The defendant’s financial resources.......................................................................................... 60

Other specific matters to be considered under the Act......................................................... 62

The evidence and credibility of the witnesses....................................................................... 63

The plaintiff, Mrs Moss and Mrs Butler were credible witnesses............................................. 64
The defendant was not a credible witness................................................................................. 65
Mr Edwards was not a credible witness................................................................................... 69
The remaining witnesses.......................................................................................................... 69

Conclusions.................................................................................................................................. 70

The relationship between the plaintiff and the deceased was not one of estrangement.............. 70
The deceased did not make adequate provision in leaving the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Brandon v Hanley

Details

AGLC: Brandon v Hanley [2014] VSC 103
Case: [2014] VSC 103
Decision Date: 21 March 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved an application by an adult son of the deceased, seeking additional maintenance from the estate of his late father. The deceased had left legacies to both the adult son and daughter, with the remaining estate bequeathed to another adult daughter. The court was tasked with determining whether the deceased had a responsibility to provide further for the adult son and, if so, whether the estate should be ordered to make such provision. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria, presided over by Justice Smith.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the deceased had a duty to provide for the adult son beyond the legacies specified in the will and, if such a duty existed, whether the estate should be ordered to make further provision. The court had to consider the relevant provisions of the Administration and Probate Act 1958, particularly Part IV, which deals with family maintenance. The court also needed to evaluate the financial circumstances of the adult son and the ability of the estate to make additional provision.

Justice Smith found that the deceased did indeed have a responsibility to make further provision for the adult son, considering the son's financial needs and the resources of the estate. The court noted that while the adult son had received a legacy, it was insufficient to meet his reasonable needs. The court also took into account the deceased's conduct during his lifetime, which suggested a willingness to support his children financially. Based on these findings, Justice Smith ordered that the estate should make additional provision for the adult son to meet his reasonable needs.

The final orders of the court mandated that the estate provide additional funds to the adult son to cover his reasonable maintenance needs. The specific amount and method of payment were to be determined by the executors of the estate, in consultation with the adult son. This decision underscored the court's role in ensuring that the deceased's family is adequately provided for, in accordance with their reasonable needs and the resources available in the estate.

Orders