Summers v Garland

The case of Summers v Garland [2006] QSC 085 involved Ms. Barbara Fay Summers, the applicant, seeking additional provision from the estate of Peter James Garland, who had passed away. Ms. Summers claimed she was in a de facto relationship with the deceased for 16 years and that she was substantially supported by him. The testator left a will dated 9 July 2002, which left Ms. Summers a property at 14 Hawke Street, Emu Park together with its contents, excluding antiques and collectable items, and a legacy of $50,000. The estate's value at the time of trial was between $2,239,540.39 and $2,364,540.39.

The three principal issues to be determined were: 1) whether the time should be extended for the making of this application; 2) whether Ms. Summers was a "dependant" under the Succession Act 1981; and 3) whether proper provision was made for Ms. Summers. The court found that the application should be heard out of time, that Ms. Summers and the deceased were in a de facto relationship, and that proper provision was not made for Ms. Summers.

The court found that Ms. Summers and the deceased were in a de facto relationship, as they shared a residence, a sexual relationship, and presented to third parties as a couple. The court found that the deceased substantially supported Ms. Summers by providing her with a house, a vehicle, and financial support. The provision made for Ms. Summers under the will was found to be inadequate, taking into account the nature and length of the relationship, her contribution to the preservation and improvement of the assets, and the sacrifices she made to her own capacity for financial independence by maintaining the relationship.

The court ordered that further provision be made for the proper maintenance and support of Ms. Summers out of the estate of Peter James Garland by treating the will as if it bequeathed to her the whole of the testator's interest in the property at 14 Hawke Street, Emu Park, free of encumbrances, together with the household chattels, and by distributing to her the sum of $303,500 in lieu of the sum of $50,000 presently provided for.