Davy v Black

In the case of Davy v Black, the plaintiff, Davy, sought a family provision order from the court against her sister, the first defendant, Black, who was the sole beneficiary of the estate of their deceased father. Davy contended that she had been unfairly disadvantaged by her father's will, which left her only a racehorse, while the residue of the estate was left to Black. The court was required to determine whether Davy's claim was valid under the Succession Act 2006 and whether it was just and equitable to make a family provision order in her favour.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether Davy had been unfairly prejudiced by the terms of her father's will, which left her only a racehorse, and whether the court should make a family provision order in her favour. The court had to consider the relevant provisions of the Succession Act 2006, including the factors set out in section 46 that the court must consider when deciding whether to make a family provision order. The court also had to consider the evidence of the transfers of assets to Black during their father's lifetime and whether these transfers had any bearing on the fairness of the will.

The court found that Davy had been unfairly prejudiced by the terms of her father's will and that it was just and equitable to make a family provision order in her favour. The court noted that the deceased had made significant transfers of assets to Black during his lifetime, which had the effect of disadvantaging Davy. The court also found that the deceased had made further provision for Davy after the execution of the will, which supported the argument that Davy had been unfairly prejudiced. The court considered the factors set out in section 46 of the Succession Act 2006 and found that they favoured making a family provision order in Davy's favour. The court ordered that Black pay Davy a lump sum of $200,000 within 28 days of the judgment.