Family Provision (Amendment) Act 1996 (ACT)

In the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, the case involved a dispute concerning the distribution of an estate under the Family Provision Act 1969 (ACT). The central issue was whether the applicant, who was not the deceased’s legal spouse, qualified for a family provision order under the amended Family Provision (Amendment) Act 1996 (ACT). The applicant sought financial provision from the deceased's estate, arguing they had a domestic relationship with the deceased that should entitle them to a claim.

The court needed to determine whether the applicant's relationship with the deceased qualified as a "domestic partner" under the amended Act, and if so, whether this relationship warranted a family provision order. The court considered the definitions and criteria set out in the amended Act, particularly the new definitions of "domestic partner" and "eligible partner," and the circumstances under which such relationships could attract family provision orders.

The court held that the applicant's relationship with the deceased qualified as a domestic partnership, satisfying the criteria for a domestic relationship under the amended Act. The court found that the applicant had lived with the deceased in a domestic relationship for two years continuously, providing personal and financial support. Additionally, the court concluded that the applicant had made significant contributions to the deceased’s welfare and property. Consequently, the court granted the applicant a family provision order, deeming it just and equitable to provide for the applicant from the deceased's estate.

The final orders mandated that the estate provide adequate financial support to the applicant, reflecting the court’s consideration of the criteria and the nature of the relationship between the deceased and the applicant.