Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
- Summary available
Medium Neutral Citation: Megerditchian v Khatchadourian [2020] NSWCA 229 Hearing dates: 28 July 2020 Date of orders: 25 September 2020 Decision date: 25 September 2020 Before: Macfarlan JA at [1]; Payne JA at [2]; Emmett AJA at [67] Decision: (1) Appeal dismissed;
(2) Appellant to pay the costs of the respondent.
Catchwords: SUCCESSION – family provision – claim by adult child – judgment in favour of appellant for provision from notional estate – whether adequate provision for the proper maintenance, education or advancement of the appellant
Legislation Cited: Family Provision Act 1982 (NSW)
Succession Act 2006 (NSW), Pt 3.3, ss 57(1)(c), 59, 60, Ch 3
Cases Cited: Andrew v Andrew (2012) 81 NSWLR 656; [2012] NSWCA 308
Blendell v Blendell [2020] NSWCA 154
Goodman v Windeyer (1980) 144 CLR 490; [1980] HCA 31
House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40
HughesvNationalTrustees,Executorsand AgencyCompanyofAustralasiaLimited (1979) 143 CLR 134; [1979] HCA 2
McCosker v McCosker (1957) 97 CLR 566; [1957] HCA 82
Megerditchian v Khatchadourian [2019] NSWSC 1870
Megerditchian v Khatchadourian (No 2) [2020] NSWSC 112
Nicholls v Hall [2007] NSWCA 356
Norbis v Norbis (1986) 161 CLR 513; [1986] HCA 17
Poletti v Jones [2015] NSWCA 107
Re the Will of FB Gilbert (1946) 46 SR (NSW) 318
Sgro v Thompson [2017] NSWCA 326
Singer v Berghouse (1994) 181 CLR 201; [1994] HCA 40
Slack v Rogan (2013) 85 NSWLR 253; [2013] NSWSC 522
Texts Cited: HF Jolowicz and Barry Nicholas, Historical Introduction to the Study of Roman Law (3rd ed, 1972, Cambridge University Press)
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Vanoush Megerditchian (Appellant)
Hampartzoum Khatchadourian (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
V R W Gray (Appellant)
C Wood SC with P J Muscat (Respondent)
Corporate & Civil Legal (Appellant)
Shad Partners (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2020/83474 Publication restriction: Nil. Decision under appeal
- Court or tribunal:
- Supreme Court of New South Wales
- Jurisdiction:
- Equity - Family Provision List
- Citation:
- Date of Decision:
- 20 December 2019
- Before:
- Parker J
- File Number(s):
- 2018/318533
HEADNOTE
[This headnote is not to be read as part of the judgment]
The appellant, Vanoush Megerditchian, aged 71, successfully sought provision under the Succession Act 2006 (NSW) out of the estate of her late father, Souren Khatchadourian, who died in May 2019 at the age of 91. The primary judge found that proper provision did not require equality between the testator’s children and that Mr Khatchadourian was entitled to make greater provision for his son who remained close to his parents over many decades than for his daughter who did not. The primary judge rejected the appellant’s case that proper provision for the appellant required the purchase for her of a house, together…
Continue reading Megerditchian v Khatchadourian
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Megerditchian v Khatchadourian [2020] NSWCA 229
- Case
- [2020] NSWCA 229
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the provision ordered by the primary judge constituted adequate provision for the proper maintenance, education, or advancement of the appellant. This required the Court to consider the deceased's responsibilities to the appellant and the appellant's needs in light of the size and nature of the estate.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the primary judge's decision was not erroneous. The Court applied the principles governing family provision claims, which require a balancing of the deceased's testamentary intentions against the applicant's needs and the overall circumstances of the estate. The Court concluded that the provision made by the primary judge was adequate and that no further provision was warranted. Consequently, the appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the respondent.
Orders
Orders of the court
(1) Appeal dismissed;
(2) Appellant to pay the costs of the respondent.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.