Rogers v Roe (Estate of the Late Irene Clipsham)

The case of Rogers v Roe (Estate of the Late Irene Clipsham) involved a dispute over the distribution of the estate of Irene Clipsham, who had passed away. The deceased had left her estate to her husband, the respondent, and excluded her daughter, the applicant, from her will. The applicant sought a family provision order under the Family Provision Act 1969 (NSW), arguing that she had been unfairly disadvantaged by the will. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the applicant had made out a case for a family provision order, given that the estate was relatively small. The court had to consider whether the applicant had been left without adequate provision for her maintenance, education, or advancement in life, as required by section 46(1) of the Act. Additionally, the court had to balance this with the testator's right to dispose of her property as she sees fit, as protected under section 45 of the Act.

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case for a family provision order. The small size of the estate meant that it could be divided equally between the two daughters without depriving the respondent of the benefit of the estate. The court emphasised that the deceased's decision to exclude the applicant from her will was not justified by any special circumstances. In reaching this conclusion, the court took into account the statutory presumption that the estate should be distributed equally between the daughters and the applicant's need for adequate provision for her future. The court ordered that the estate be divided equally between the applicant and the respondent.