Girotto v Girotto

The case of Girotto v Girotto involved a dispute between two adult sons over their mother’s estate. The deceased had made a will leaving the majority of her estate to one son, leaving the other son with a lesser share. The son who received the smaller share sought to challenge the will on the basis that it did not make reasonable financial provision for him. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The legal issues before the court were whether the deceased had a clear and rational intention to leave most of her estate to one son, and whether the court should exercise its discretion to make an order under the Family Provision Act 1969 (Qld) to provide reasonable financial provision for the applicant son. The court had to consider the deceased's intention, the nature of the relationship between the deceased and the applicant, and whether the applicant had been provided for by the deceased during her lifetime.

The court found that the deceased had a clear and rational intention to leave most of her estate to one son, and that this intention was reflected in the will. The court noted that the deceased had provided for the applicant son during her lifetime, including providing him with a home and financial support. The court also found that the relationship between the deceased and the applicant son was not as close as that between the deceased and the other son. Based on these findings, the court declined to exercise its discretion to make an order under the Family Provision Act. The court held that the will reflected the deceased's clear and rational intention, and that the applicant son had not established that the will failed to make reasonable financial provision for him.

The court made no order in favour of the applicant son. The will of the deceased was upheld, and the estate was distributed according to the terms of the will.