Lado Causillas v NSW Trustee and Guardian; Bentancor Lado v NSW Trustee and Guardian

The case of Lado Causillas v NSW Trustee and Guardian; Bentancor Lado v NSW Trustee and Guardian was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, dealing with claims for family provision and maintenance under the Succession Act 2006 (NSW). The applicants, the deceased's estranged wife and son, sought relief on the grounds that the deceased had not made sufficient provision for them in his will. The legal issues at hand required the court to determine what constitutes "adequate" and "proper" provision, "maintenance," and "advancement in life" under section 59(1)(c) of the Act, as well as whether the deceased's provision was "wise and just" and appropriate according to community standards.

The court affirmed the two-step approach outlined in section 59 of the Act, emphasising that each case must be assessed on its own unique circumstances. For the wife, the court found that the deceased's unilateral abrogation of his marital duties did not negate his legal obligations. Despite the Uruguayan court's order ending the community of assets, the wife remained legally married to the deceased. The deceased had enjoyed financial benefits from not fulfilling his obligations to his wife, and the court held that moral obligations could not be escaped through repudiation or evasion. Consequently, the court ruled that the deceased had made inadequate provision for his wife. For the son, the court considered the extremity of the circumstances, noting that the deceased's failure to perform his paternal duties was contrary to community expectations. The son's conduct in not attempting to re-establish the relationship did not disentitle him to provision, and the court held that inadequate provision had been made for him as well.

The court exercised its discretionary power under section 60 of the Act to grant relief to both applicants, considering the unique circumstances of each case. The effect of long-term estrangement was also a significant factor, with the court acknowledging the relevance of "bare widowhood" and "bare paternity." The final orders of the court are not detailed in the provided text but would likely involve directing the trustee to make financial provision for the wife and son from the deceased's estate.