Legal Research
Cases
Huxtable v Hawkins

Huxtable v Hawkins

Case [2018] NSWSC 174 23 February 2018

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Estate Hawkins; Huxtable v Hawkins [2018] NSWSC 174
Hearing dates: 26, 27 and 28 June 2017
Date of orders: 23 February 2018
Decision date: 23 February 2018
Before: Lindsay J
Decision:
As de facto wife of the deceased (following a three year relationship with him), the plaintiff is to receive (as family provision relief under Chapter 3 of the Succession Act 2006 NSW) a legacy of $75,000 from the estate, or notional estate, of the deceased, whose principal beneficiaries are his three young adult children by an earlier relationship.

Catchwords: SUCCESSION – Family provision and maintenance – Eligibility – De facto spouse – Admitted relationship as a couple – Dispute as to whether “living together” – Peripatetic lifestyle of Deceased – Relationship of three years’ standing – Competing claims of Deceased’s children from earlier marriage – Relief granted.
Legislation Cited: Interpretation Act 1987 NSW
Succession Act 2006 NSW
Cases Cited: Amprimo v Wynn [2015] NSWCA 286
Andrew v Andrew (2012) 81 NSWLR 656
Bosch v Perpetual Trustee Company Limited [1938]’ AC 463
Goodman v Windeyer (1980) 144 CLR 490
Hills v Chalk [2008] QCA 159; [2009] 1 QD R 409
In re Allen [1922] NZLR 218
Petersen v Gregory [2007] NSWSC 8
Pontifical Society for the Propagation of the Faith v Scales (1962) 17 CLR 9
Sadiq v NSW Trustee and Guardian [2015] NSWSC 716
Smoje v Forrester [2017] NSWCA 308
Thompson v Public Trustee of NSW [2010] NSWSC 1137
Vaughan v Hoskovich [2010] NSWSC 706
Texts Cited: -
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Plaintiff: Victoria Barbara Huxtable
Defendant: Harry Zac Hawkins
Representation:
Counsel:
Plaintiff: S Chapple
Defendant: V Bedrossian and D Turner
Solicitors:
Plaintiff: Sommerville Legal
Defendant: Hunt & Hunt

File Number(s): 2016/00062323

Judgment

INTRODUCTION

By a summons filed within the time limited by section 58 of the Succession Act 2006 NSW, and claiming the status of a “de facto” spouse of the deceased within the meaning of section 57(1)(b) of the Act, Victoria Barbara Huxtable (“the plaintiff”) applies to the Court for a grant of family provision relief under Chapter 3 of the Act from the estate, or notional estate, of David Michael Hawkins (“the deceased”), who died on 19 August 2015 aged 54 years.
The deceased left a will dated 13 May 2013, probate of which was granted to his eldest child, Harry (“the defendant”), on 8 April 2016.
The deceased was married only once, to Katrina. They separated in or about late 2011.
There were three children of the deceased’s marriage to Katrina; namely:

a son, the defendant, now aged about 23 years.

a second son, Thomas (Tom), now aged about 21 years.

a daughter, Naomi, now aged about 20 years.

By his will, the deceased appointed a solicitor, Mr CJ Mills, and the defendant as executors and trustees; he gave a legacy of $25,000 to Naomi; and he divided the residue of his estate between his three children in equal parts, to be held on…

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 Huxtable v Hawkins

Details

AGLC: Huxtable v Hawkins [2018] NSWSC 174
Case: [2018] NSWSC 174
Decision Date: 23 February 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Huxtable v Hawkins involved a dispute regarding family provision and maintenance claims under the Succession Act 2006 (NSW). The deceased, Mr. Hawkins, had passed away, leaving behind a complex family structure, including children from a previous marriage and a de facto spouse, Ms. Huxtable, with whom he had been in a relationship for three years. The primary issue in the case was whether Ms. Huxtable qualified as a de facto spouse under the Act, particularly focusing on the requirement of the couple living together on a genuine domestic basis.

The court had to determine whether Ms. Huxtable and Mr. Hawkins had satisfied the criteria for being considered a de facto couple, specifically the requirement of living together on a genuine domestic basis. This was complicated by the couple’s peripatetic lifestyle, involving frequent travel and changes of residence. Additionally, the court needed to assess the competing claims for family provision from the deceased’s children from his earlier marriage. The court had to balance the statutory criteria for de facto relationships against the practicalities of the couple's living arrangements and their commitment to each other.

In its judgment, the court held that despite the transient nature of their living arrangements, Ms. Huxtable and Mr. Hawkins had indeed been living together on a genuine domestic basis. The relationship was characterised by mutual commitment and shared domestic responsibilities, fulfilling the legal requirements of a de facto relationship. The court acknowledged the three-year duration of their relationship and their lifestyle, which demonstrated a pattern of cohabitation and shared life. Consequently, Ms. Huxtable was recognised as a de facto spouse, and her claim for family provision was successful. The court ordered that appropriate relief be provided to Ms. Huxtable from the estate.

Orders