Medium Neutral Citation: Olsen v Olsen & Ors [2019] NSWCA 278
Hearing dates: 1 October 2019
Decision date: 19 November 2019
Before: Meagher JA at [1];
White JA at [2];
Emmett AJA at [85]
Decision:
Appeal dismissed with costs.

Catchwords:
APPEALS – actual or apprehended bias – unfavourable comments at pre-trial hearing – whether primary judge dissuadable from alleged fixed opinion – criticism of legal representatives – whether justified – whether indicative of bias
SUCCESSION – family provision – claim by adult son – where deceased remarried – where deceased left entire estate to family from second marriage – deceased’s moral obligation to widow – discussion of role of freedom of testamentary disposition in family provision claims
Legislation Cited: Succession Act 2006 (NSW), ss 8, 59, 60, 91
Cases Cited: ALA15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCAFC 30
Concrete Pty Ltd v Parramatta Design & Developments Pty Ltd (2006) 229 CLR 577; [2006] HCA 55
Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337; [2000] HCA 63
Friend v Brien [2014] NSWSC 613
Gorton v Parks (1989) 17 NSWLR 1
House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40
In re Sinnott (1948) VLR 279
Isbester v Knox City Council (2015) 255 CLR 135; [2015] HCA 20
Jamal v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2019] NSWCA 121
Johnson v Johnson (2000) 201 CLR 488; [2000] HCA 48
Kleinig v Neal (No 2) [1981] 2 NSWLR 532
Lloyd-Williams v Mayfield (2005) 63 NSWLR 1; [2005] NSWCA 189
Mayfield v Lloyd-Williams [2004] NSWSC 419
Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Nicholls (2011) 244 CLR 427; [2011] HCA 48
Olsen v Olsen [2019] NSWSC 217
Pontifical Society for the Propagation of the Faith v Scales (1962) 107 CLR 9; [1962] HCA 19
Reid v Commercial Club (Albury) Ltd [2014] NSWCA 98
Revell v Revell [2016] NSWSC 947
Sgro v Thompson [2017] NSWCA 326
Slack v Rogan (2013) 85 NSWLR 253; [2013] NSWSC 522
Squire v Squire [2019] NSWCA 90
Steinmetz v Shannon [2018] NSWSC 1090
Steinmetz v Shannon [2019] NSWCA 114; (2019) 368 ALR 161
Stott v Cook [1960] 33 ALJR 447
Taylor v Farrugia [2009] NSWSC 801
Vakuata v Kelly (1989) 167 CLR 568; [1989] HCA 44
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Craig Olsen (Appellant)
Dean Richard Olsen (First Respondent)
Micheline Isabelle Olsen (Second Respondent)
Faye Beverley Olsen (Third Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
I Coleman SC with L Clarke (Appellant)
M Condon SC with D Robertson and Q Noakhtar (Respondents)
Solicitors:
Next Legal & Conveyancing (Appellant)
Robertson Saxton Osborne (Respondents)

File Number(s): 2019/97536
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

Supreme Court of New South Wales

Jurisdiction:

Equity Division

Citation:

[2019] NSWSC 217

Date of Decision:

15 March 2019

Before:

Pembroke J

File Number(s):

2017/155788

HEADNOTE

[This headnote is not to be read as part of the decision]

The appellant challenged a decision of a judge of the…

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 Olsen v Olsen

Details

AGLC: Olsen v Olsen [2019] NSWCA 278
Case: [2019] NSWCA 278
Decision Date: 19 November 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal concerned allegations of apprehended bias against the primary judge, and a claim for provision from the deceased's estate by the appellant, an adult son. The deceased had remarried and left his entire estate to his second wife and her children, leaving nothing to the appellant from his first marriage.

The court was required to determine whether the primary judge's comments during a pre-trial hearing indicated a fixed opinion or bias against the appellant or his legal representatives, thereby giving rise to an apprehension of bias. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the deceased had a moral obligation to provide for his adult son, notwithstanding his obligation to his second wife and her family, and the principle of testamentary freedom.

The court found that the primary judge's criticisms of the legal representatives, while perhaps sharp, were justified by the conduct of the proceedings and did not demonstrate a closed mind or bias. The court affirmed that freedom of testamentary disposition is a significant factor in family provision claims, and that while a deceased has a moral obligation to provide for their children, this obligation must be balanced against other moral claims, such as those owed to a surviving spouse. In this instance, the court concluded that the deceased had discharged any moral obligation to the appellant by reason of his substantial provision for his second wife.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal dismissed with costs.

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

Olsen v Olsen [2019] NSWCA 278

Most Recent Citation

Umt Holdings Pty Ltd v Rankin Saunders Pty Ltd [2019] SADC 199

Cases citing this decision · 20 of 20 shown

Liosatos v Liosatos
[2025] NSWSC 44 Para 98

…in Slack v Rogan . [109] 106. Steinmetz v Shannon per Brereton JA at [94]-[97] and White JA at [52]-[56]. 107. Olsen v Olsen (2019) 101 NSWLR 225; [2019] NSWCA 278 (Olsen) per White JA at [76]-[77], Meagher JA at [1] and Emmett AJA at [85] agreeing. 108. Steinmetz v Shannon per White JA at [52], [56]; Pontifical S…
Alessandra Hart v Gerard John Basha
[2024] NSWSC 1441 Para 191

…35] (Payne JA, Macfarlan JA and Emmett AJA agreeing) and the authorities there referred to; Olsen v Olsen (2019) 101 NSWLR 225; [2019] NSWCA 278 at [75]–[78] (White JA, Meagher JA and Emmett AJA agreeing); Steinmetz v Shannon (2019) 99 NSWLR 687; [2019] NSWCA 114 at [49]-[56] (White JA) and [94]-[97] (Brereton JA,…
Frank v Angell
[2024] NSWSC 158 Para 131

…JA’s concurring remarks at [49]-[56], which White JA (with whom Meagher JA and Emmett AJA agreed) adhered to in Olsen v Olsen (2019) 101 NSWLR 225; [2019] NSWCA 278 at [78]. However, in considering what is “proper”, considerable weight may be given to the assessment of a capable testator or testatrix who has given…
Soulos v Pagones
[2023] NSWCA 243

…v Norbis (1986) 161 CLR 513; [1986] HCA 17 Olsen v Olsen (2019) 101 NSWLR 225; [2019] NSWCA 278 Owies v JJE Nominees Pty Ltd (ACN 004 856 366) (in its capacity ATF the Owies Family Trust) [2022] VSCA 142 Parker v Auswild; Bergmuller v Auswild [2022] VSCA 8 Parsons v McBain (2001) 109 FCR 120; [2001] FCA 376 Perpet…
Savet v Rosebank College
[2023] NSWSC 1015 Para 132

…en adopted in subsequent cases including Windsor v Health Care Complaints Commission [2020] NSWCA 110 at [55] and Olsen v Olsen (2019) 101 NSWLR 225; [2019] NSWCA 278 at [35]. Those principles relevantly include:…
Schneider v Kemeny; Kemeny v Schneider
[2021] NSWSC 524 Para 13

…JA’s concurring remarks at [49]-[56], which White JA (with whom Meagher JA and Emmett AJA agreed) adhered to in Olsen v Olsen (2019) 101 NSWLR 225; [2019] NSWCA 278 at [78]. However, in considering what is “proper”, considerable weight may be given to the assessment of a capable testator or testatrix who has given…
Limberger v Limberger; Oakman v Limberger
[2021] NSWSC 474 Para 59

…In Olsen v Olsen [2019] NSWCA 278, the Court of Appeal dealt with complaints about some comments expressed by the trial Judge about the nature and length of the Plaintiff’s affidavits. At [64] – [65], White JA (Meagher JA and Emmett AJA agreeing at [1] and [91] respectively), wrote:…
Y v The Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice (No 5)
[2021] NSWDC 117 Para 1

…hopelessly flawed, will not be sufficient. The circumstances in which actual bias is established will be rare and exceptional. In Olsen v Olsen & Ors [2019] NSWCA 278, at [35], the principles to be followed for a finding concerning a finding of actual bias were identified as follows:…
White Constructions Pty Ltd v PBS Holdings Pty Ltd
[2020] NSWCA 277 Para 149

…und in statements made by a judge in a family provision case to counsel for the successful defendants quoted in Olsen v Olsen (2019) 101 NSWLR 225; [2019] NSWCA 278 at [69]. I am not suggesting that this might be an explanation for the primary judge’s observations in the present case; only that it is unsafe for thi…
Kirkman v Minister Administering the Crown Lands Act (No. 2)
[2020] NSWSC 1494 Para 81

…ws v Australian Broadcasting Tribunal (1990) 170 CLR 70; (1990) 93 ALR 435; [1990] HCA 31 at 91 and Olsen v Olsen & Ors (2019) 101 NSWLR 225; [2019] NSWCA 278. The question is not whether a decision-maker’s mind is blank; it is whether it is open to persuasion: Jia Le Geng at [71]. Ms Kirkman submitted that the ele…
Smith v Moore
[2020] NSWSC 1446 Para 30

…he authorities there cited; Harris v Carter ( supra ) at [138]–[152] and the authorities there referred to; Olsen v Olsen (2019) 101 NSWLR 225; [2019] NSWCA 278 at [75]–[78] (White JA, adhering to the views his Honour expressed in Steinmetz v Shannon ( supra ) at [49]–[56]; Meagher JA and Emmett AJA agreeing); Stei…
Shelley v Prager
[2020] NSWSC 1393 Para 33

…he authorities there cited; Harris v Carter ( supra ) at [138]–[152] and the authorities there referred to; Olsen v Olsen (2019) 101 NSWLR 225; [2019] NSWCA 278 at [75]–[78] (White JA, adhering to the views his Honour expressed in Steinmetz v Shannon ( supra ) at [49]–[56]; Meagher JA and Emmett AJA agreeing); Stei…
Spiteri v Vassallo
[2020] NSWSC 890 Para 26

…) at [155]–[159] and the authorities there cited; Harris v Carter ( supra ) at [138]–[152] and the authorities there referred to; Olsen v Olsen [2019] NSWCA 278 at [75]–[78] (White JA, adhering to the views his Honour expressed in Steinmetz v Shannon ( supra ) at [49]–[56]; Meagher JA and Emmett AJA agreeing); Stei…
MacAlpine v MacAlpine
[2020] NSWSC 824 Para 341

…As his Honour acknowledged in Olsen v Olsen [2019] NSWCA 278 at [76]-[78], this statement of principle could be controversial if it were understood to involve a reading down of the Court’s powers under the Act so as to preserve testamentary freedom. But it is not necessary to go into that here. His Honour’s stateme…
Bowers v Bowers
[2020] NSWSC 109

…zie v Topp [2004] VSC 90 Mead v Kerney [2012] NSWCA 215 Nominal Defendant v Livaja [2011] NSWCA 121 Olsen v Olsen [2019] NSWCA 278 Poletti v Jones (2015) 13 ASTLR 113; [2015] NSWCA 107 Pontifical Society for the Propagation of the Faith v Scales (1962) 107 CLR 9; [1962] HCA 19 R (on the application of M) v Slough B…
Umt Holdings Pty Ltd v Rankin Saunders Pty Ltd
[2019] SADC 199

…04] 219 CLR 597;; ABC v XIVth Commonwealth Games (1988) 18 NSWLR 540;; Mushroom Composters v IS & DE Robertson Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCA 1;; Olsen v Olsen [2019] NSWCA 278; and; Flowfill Packaging Machines v Fytore Pty Ltd BC 9302155, referred to. Bunnings Group Ltd v CHEP Australia Ltd [2011] NSWCA 342 at [166]-[186];…
Stockwell v Beaumont;; O'Donnell v Beaumont
[2019] NSWSC 1811

…Grant v Roberts, Smith v Smith, Roberts v Smith, Curtis v Smith [2019] NSWSC 843 Lodin v Lodin [2017] NSWCA 327 Olsen v Olsen & Ors [2019] NSWCA 278 Oshlack v Richmond River Council [1998] HCA 11; (1998) 193 CLR 72 Steinmetz v Shannon [2019] NSWCA 114; (2019) 368 ALR 161 Verzar v Verzar [2014] NSWCA 45; (2014) 12 A…
Re Leaver
[1996] QSC 28

…1977) 1 NSWLR 182); and a trust in respect of the property itself after the circumstances changed so that the prohibition no longer had application ( Olsen v Olsen (1977) 1 NSWLR 189). While equity will usually not come to the aid of a party where the transaction is prohibited by law ( Chalmers v Pardoe (1963) 1 W.L.R.…
Re Williams, P. Ex parte Official Trustee in Bankruptcy v Di Pietro, E
[1994] FCA 916

…as amended, and in particular section 55, and the authorities Pearce v Pearce (1977) 1 NSWLR 170, Horton v The Public Trustee (1977) 1 NSWLR 182 and Olsen v Olsen (1977) 1 NSWLR 189.…
Re John Raymond Murrell Ex Parte The Official Trustee in Bankruptcy
[1984] FCA 347

…It follows that during the period of Murrell's bankruptcy and until his discharge clause 7 of the document of 22 August 1975 was of no force or effect so far as it granted or disposed of an interest in the land. And it follows that at no time during that period or at the date of the discharge was it…

View all 20 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 32 of 32 shown

Jamal v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)
[2019] NSWCA 121 Para 34

…v Parramatta Design & Developments Pty Ltd (2006) 229 CLR 577; [2006] HCA 55 at [116]-[117], cf [172]; Jamal v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2019] NSWCA 121 at [53]).…
Steinmetz v Shannon
[2019] NSWCA 114 Para 73

…A agreed) in Squire v Squire [2019] NSWCA 90 at [10] and the views of Brereton JA (with whom Simpson AJA also agreed at [151]) in Steinmetz v Shannon [2019] NSWCA 114; (2019) 368 ALR 161 at [96]-[97]. In Squire v Squire (decided after the hearing of the appeal in Steinmetz v Shannon ) Meagher JA said (at [10]) of t…
Squire v Squire
[2019] NSWCA 90 Para 73

…estamentary disposition. There may be some tension between the views of Meagher JA (with whom Macfarlan JA and Simpson AJA agreed) in Squire v Squire [2019] NSWCA 90 at [10] and the views of Brereton JA (with whom Simpson AJA also agreed at [151]) in Steinmetz v Shannon [2019] NSWCA 114; (2019) 368 ALR 161 at [96]…
Olsen v Olsen
[2019] NSWSC 217 Para 2

…ision order under s 59 of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW) from the estate or notional estate of the late Colin Richard Olsen of Manly ( Olsen v Olsen [2019] NSWSC 217).…
Steinmetz v Shannon
[2018] NSWSC 1090 Para 49

…appellant’s counsel to the judgment of this Court in Sgro v Thompson [2017] NSWCA 326 and to his Honour’s judgments in Steinmetz v Shannon [2018] NSWSC 1090 and Revell v Revell [2016] NSWSC 947 and commented adversely on the appellant’s affidavit.…
Sgro v Thompson
[2017] NSWCA 326 Para 49

…e expressed some scepticism about the appellant’s claim. He referred the appellant’s counsel to the judgment of this Court in Sgro v Thompson [2017] NSWCA 326 and to his Honour’s judgments in Steinmetz v Shannon [2018] NSWSC 1090 and Revell v Revell [2016] NSWSC 947 and commented adversely on the appellant’s affida…
Revell v Revell
[2016] NSWSC 947 Para 49

…f this Court in Sgro v Thompson [2017] NSWCA 326 and to his Honour’s judgments in Steinmetz v Shannon [2018] NSWSC 1090 and Revell v Revell [2016] NSWSC 947 and commented adversely on the appellant’s affidavit.…
ALA15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection
[2016] FCAFC 30 Para 58

…ed how this submission could stand with the decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court in ALA15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCAFC 30, Mr Coleman SC abandoned the submission.…
Isbester v Knox City Council
[2015] HCA 20 Para 36

…A 63 at [6]; Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Nicholls (2011) 244 CLR 427; [2011] HCA 48 at [31]; and Isbester v Knox City Council (2015) 255 CLR 135; [2015] HCA 20 at [12], [57]). The question is whether the informed and fair-minded lay observer might apprehend that the primary judge might have predetermined the…
Friend v Brien
[2014] NSWSC 613 Para 72

…Under the heading “The Testator’s Judgment” the primary judge referred to what I said in Friend v Brien [2014] NSWSC 613 at [62], Slack v Rogan (2013) 85 NSWLR 253; [2013] NSWSC 522 at [127] and Sgro v Thompson at [80]-[88]. I said that where it can be seen that a testator has duly considered the claims on his esta…
Reid v Commercial Club (Albury) Ltd
[2014] NSWCA 98 Para 35

…mmon ground that the principles in relation to a finding of actual bias were correctly expounded by Gleeson JA in Reid v Commercial Club (Albury) Ltd [2014] NSWCA 98 at [68]-[74] as follows:…
Slack v Rogan; Palffy v Rogan (No. 2)
[2013] NSWSC 827 Para 72

…Under the heading “The Testator’s Judgment” the primary judge referred to what I said in Friend v Brien [2014] NSWSC 613 at [62], Slack v Rogan (2013) 85 NSWLR 253; [2013] NSWSC 522 at [127] and Sgro v Thompson at [80]-[88]. I said that where it can be seen that a testator has duly considered the claims on his estate,…
Slack v Rogan
[2013] NSWSC 522 Para 72

…e Testator’s Judgment” the primary judge referred to what I said in Friend v Brien [2014] NSWSC 613 at [62], Slack v Rogan (2013) 85 NSWLR 253; [2013] NSWSC 522 at [127] and Sgro v Thompson at [80]-[88]. I said that where it can be seen that a testator has duly considered the claims on his estate, respect should be…
Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Nicholls
[2011] HCA 48

…of prejudgment requires an assessment of the state of mind of the judge in question: Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Nicholls [2011] HCA 48; 244 CLR 427 at 437 [33]. However, actual bias need not be confined to an intentional state of mind. Bias may be subconscious, provided it is real: Bilgin v Minister for…
Taylor v Farrugia
[2009] NSWSC 801 Para 18

…d Stott v Cook [1960] 33 ALJR 447 at 455. His Honour did not refer to, and was not referred to, Gorton v Parks (1989) 17 NSWLR 1 or Taylor v Farrugia [2009] NSWSC 801.…
South Western Sydney Area Health Service v Edmonds
[2007] NSWCA 16 Para 97

…y proved; that such a finding should not be made lightly; and that cogent evidence is required: South Western Sydney Area Health Services v Edmonds [2007] NSWCA 16 at [97] and the authorities there cited. 69 Where the issue is actual bias in the form of prejudgment, the appellant had to establish that the primary…
Concrete Pty Ltd v Parramatta Design & Developments Pty Ltd
[2006] HCA 55 Para 34

…ion for retrial. These grounds of appeal should be dealt with first ( Concrete Pty Ltd v Parramatta Design & Developments Pty Ltd (2006) 229 CLR 577; [2006] HCA 55 at [116]-[117], cf [172]; Jamal v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2019] NSWCA 121 at [53]).…
Lloyd-Williams v Mayfield
[2005] NSWCA 189 Para 54

…to the objection taken in the present case. In a passage later cited with approval by this Court in Lloyd-Williams v Mayfield (2005) 63 NSWLR 1; [2005] NSWCA 189 at [35]-[36], Holland J said:…
Vigolo v Bostin
[2005] HCA 11

…f a testator’: Pontifical Society for the Propagation of the Faith v Scales (1962) 107 CLR 9 at 19; [1962] HCA 19 (Dixon CJ); Vigolo v Bostin (2005) 221 CLR 191; [2005] HCA 11 at [10] (Gleeson CJ).”…
Mayfield v Lloyd-Williams
[2004] NSWSC 419 Para 17

…nd that the provision sought was not for the maintenance or advancement in life of the appellant, but rather for his wife ( Mayfield v Lloyd-Williams [2004] NSWSC 419 at [135]). That contention was not raised below, nor on appeal.…
Minister for Immigration And Multicultural Affairs v Jia Legeng
[2001] HCA 17 Para 72

…o be incapable of alteration, whatever evidence or arguments may be presented’: Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Jia Legeng [2001] HCA 17; 205 CLR 507 at [72] per Gleeson CJ and Gummow J (Hayne J agreeing at [176]). See also Kirby J at [127]. 70 As Gleeson CJ and Gummow J observed in that cas…
Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy
[2000] HCA 63 Para 36

…n of the issues in the case ( Johnson v Johnson (2000) 201 CLR 488; [2000] HCA 48 at [12]; Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337; [2000] HCA 63 at [6]; Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Nicholls (2011) 244 CLR 427; [2011] HCA 48 at [31]; and Isbester v Knox City Council (2015) 255 CLR 135; [201…
Johnson v Johnson
[2000] HCA 48 Para 36

…that the judge might not bring an impartial and unprejudiced mind to the resolution of the issues in the case ( Johnson v Johnson (2000) 201 CLR 488; [2000] HCA 48 at [12]; Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337; [2000] HCA 63 at [6]; Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Nicholls (2011) 244 CLR 427…
Sun Zhan Qui v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs
[1999] FCA 119

…“68 A finding of actual bias is a grave matter: Sun v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1997) 81 FCR 71 (Sun v Minister) at 127 per Burchett J. Authority requires that an allegation of actual bias must be distinctly made and clearly proved; that such a finding should not be made lightly; and that cogent…
Bilgin v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
[1997] FCA 1022

…d to an intentional state of mind. Bias may be subconscious, provided it is real: Bilgin v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1997) 149 ALR 281 at 289–290 per Finkelstein J; Sun v Minister at 127 per Burchett J and 135 per North J. As Finkelstein J said in Bilgin v Minister at 290: The wrong involved…
Vakauta v Kelly
[1989] HCA 44 Para 37

…ted waiver of any objection to the judge’s continuing to hear and determine the matter ( Vakuata v Kelly (1989) 167 CLR 568 at 573, 577, 587-588; [1989] HCA 44; Michael Wilson & Partners at [76]). Prior to the delivery of judgment the primary judge had stated more than once that he had not formed a view and that…
Pontifical Society for the Propagation of the Faith v Scales
[1962] HCA 19 Para 18

…adult sons referring to In re Sinnott (1948) VLR 279 at 280, Pontifical Society for the Propagation of the Faith v Scales (1962) 107 CLR 9 at 19-20; [1962] HCA 19 and Stott v Cook [1960] 33 ALJR 447 at 455. His Honour did not refer to, and was not referred to, Gorton v Parks (1989) 17 NSWLR 1 or Taylor v Farrug…
House v R
[1936] HCA 40 Para 79

…Rather, he proceeded on the basis that the will was rational and explicable. This would amount to an error in the House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 sense justifying intervention if on re-exercise of the primary judge’s discretion I were to come to a different conclusion. Nonetheless, shorn of rhe…
[1994] FCA 489
[1994] FCA 489

…before that judge. As Heerey J observed at [26] and [33] in Vietnam Veterans’ Association of Australia (New South Wales Branch Inc) v Gallagher [1994] FCA 489 ; (1994) 52 FCR 34 ( Vietnam Veterans’ case ) (in rejecting as irrelevant statistical evidence which purported to show that a particular decision-maker was…
SCAA v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs
[2000] FCA 668 Para 38

…easons for decision must be considered to be rare and exceptional: SCAA v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2000] FCA 668 at [38] per von Doussa J, who explained: … Reasons for decision reflect conclusions reached at the end of the decision making process, and if the decision is a…
House v The King
63 WN 176

…al Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337; [2000] HCA 63 Friend v Brien [2014] NSWSC 613 Gorton v Parks (1989) 17 NSWLR 1 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 In re Sinnott (1948) VLR 279 Isbester v Knox City Council (2015) 255 CLR 135; [2015] HCA 20 Jamal v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2019] NSWC…
Gorton v Parks
(1989) 17 NSWLR 1 Para 18

…2) 107 CLR 9 at 19-20; [1962] HCA 19 and Stott v Cook [1960] 33 ALJR 447 at 455. His Honour did not refer to, and was not referred to, Gorton v Parks (1989) 17 NSWLR 1 or Taylor v Farrugia [2009] NSWSC 801.…

Legislation cited in this decision · 1

Succession Act 2006 (NSW)
59, 60, 8, 91 5 mentions (from Para 2)

Medium Neutral Citation:	Olsen v Olsen & Ors [2019] NSWCA 278
Hearing dates:	1 October 2019
Decision date:	19 November 2019
Before:	Meagher JA at [1]; White JA at [2]; Emmett AJA at [85]
Decision:	Appeal dismissed with costs.
Catchwords:	APPEALS – actual or apprehended bias – unfavourable comments at pre-trial hearing – whether primary judge dissuadable from alleged fixed opinion – criticism of legal representatives – whether justified – whether indicative of bias SUCCESSION – family provision – claim by adult son – where deceased remarried – where deceased left entire estate to family from second marriage – deceased’s moral obligation to widow – discussion of role of freedom of testamentary disposition in family provision claims
Legislation Cited:	Succession Act 2006 (NSW), ss 8, 59, 60, 91
Cases Cited:	ALA15 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCAFC 30 Concrete Pty Ltd v Parramatta Design & Developments Pty Ltd (2006) 229 CLR 577; [2006] HCA 55 Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337; [2000] HCA 63 Friend v Brien [2014] NSWSC 613 Gorton v Parks (1989) 17 NSWLR 1 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 In re Sinnott (1948) VLR 279 Isbester v Knox City Council (2015) 255 CLR 135; [2015] HCA 20 Jamal v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2019] NSWCA 121 Johnson v Johnson (2000) 201 CLR 488; [2000] HCA 48 Kleinig v Neal (No 2) [1981] 2 NSWLR 532 Lloyd-Williams v Mayfield (2005) 63 NSWLR 1; [2005] NSWCA 189 Mayfield v Lloyd-Williams [2004] NSWSC 419 Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Nicholls (2011) 244 CLR 427; [2011] HCA 48 Olsen v Olsen [2019] NSWSC 217 Pontifical Society for the Propagation of the Faith v Scales (1962) 107 CLR 9; [1962] HCA 19 Reid v Commercial Club (Albury) Ltd [2014] NSWCA 98 Revell v Revell [2016] NSWSC 947 Sgro v Thompson [2017] NSWCA 326 Slack v Rogan (2013) 85 NSWLR 253; [2013] NSWSC 522 Squire v Squire [2019] NSWCA 90 Steinmetz v Shannon [2018] NSWSC 1090 Steinmetz v Shannon [2019] NSWCA 114; (2019) 368 ALR 161 Stott v Cook [1960] 33 ALJR 447 Taylor v Farrugia [2009] NSWSC 801 Vakuata v Kelly (1989) 167 CLR 568; [1989] HCA 44
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Craig Olsen (Appellant) Dean Richard Olsen (First Respondent) Micheline Isabelle Olsen (Second Respondent) Faye Beverley Olsen (Third Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: I Coleman SC with L Clarke (Appellant) M Condon SC with D Robertson and Q Noakhtar (Respondents) Solicitors: Next Legal & Conveyancing (Appellant) Robertson Saxton Osborne (Respondents)
File Number(s):	2019/97536
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: Supreme Court of New South Wales Jurisdiction: Equity Division Citation: [2019] NSWSC 217 Date of Decision: 15 March 2019 Before: Pembroke J File Number(s): 2017/155788