Re May

The case of Re May involved the children of the deceased, May, who applied for family provision under the Family Provision Act 1969 (NSW). The children contended that their mother had not made adequate financial provision for them in her will. They argued that the mother's estate was substantial and that they were left with insufficient means for their support. The court was tasked with determining whether the mother had indeed failed to make sufficient provision for the applicants and if their claims were valid.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the testator had made adequate provision for the applicants. The court needed to assess the fairness of the provisions made by the deceased in her will and whether her failure to provide adequately for the applicants warranted a redistribution of her estate. Additionally, the court had to consider the conduct of the applicants to determine if any disentitling behaviour existed that would preclude them from receiving any benefits from the estate.

The court found that the deceased had indeed not made sufficient provision for the applicants, and their claims were valid. The estate was substantial, and the provisions made in the will were inadequate to support the applicants adequately. The court held that the deceased's failure to provide for the applicants was not due to any fault on their part. Therefore, the applicants were entitled to seek family provision from the estate. The court did not find any disentitling conduct by the applicants, allowing them to proceed with their claims. The final orders were made in favour of the applicants, directing that a reasonable provision be made for them from the deceased's estate.