Sun v Chapman
Case
•
[2022] NSWCA 132
•26 July 2022
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Sun v Chapman [2022] NSWCA 132
[2022] NSWCA 132
26 July 2022
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The appeal in *Sun v Chapman* concerned a claim for provision from the deceased’s estate by the appellant, who alleged she was the de facto partner of the deceased, Robin Richard Chapman. The dispute centred on whether the appellant qualified as an "eligible person" under Chapter 3 of the *Succession Act 2006* (NSW) by virtue of being in a de facto relationship with the deceased at the time of his death. The court was required to determine the standard of appellate review applicable to a primary judge's decision on whether a claimant meets the criteria for an eligible person under section 57(1) of the Act.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and dismissed the cross-appeal, setting aside the orders of the primary judge. The Court of Appeal found that the appellant was, at the time of the deceased's death, living with him in a de facto relationship. Consequently, the Court ordered that provision be made out of the deceased's estate in favour of the appellant in the sum of $555,000. This provision was to be borne by the beneficiaries of the estate in proportion to their entitlement to the proceeds of sale of a specific property. The respondent was ordered to pay the appellant's costs of the proceedings below and the appeal, to be indemnified out of the estate. Further orders were made concerning the appellant's war widow pension and gold card, and the respondent was restrained from distributing the estate pending the reinstatement of these benefits, with specific exceptions.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and dismissed the cross-appeal, setting aside the orders of the primary judge. The Court of Appeal found that the appellant was, at the time of the deceased's death, living with him in a de facto relationship. Consequently, the Court ordered that provision be made out of the deceased's estate in favour of the appellant in the sum of $555,000. This provision was to be borne by the beneficiaries of the estate in proportion to their entitlement to the proceeds of sale of a specific property. The respondent was ordered to pay the appellant's costs of the proceedings below and the appeal, to be indemnified out of the estate. Further orders were made concerning the appellant's war widow pension and gold card, and the respondent was restrained from distributing the estate pending the reinstatement of these benefits, with specific exceptions.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Equity & Trusts
-
Family Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Costs
-
Jurisdiction
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Standing
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Sun v Chapman [2022] NSWCA 132
Most Recent Citation
Fuller v R [2022] NSWCCA 203
Cases Cited
32
Statutory Material Cited
8
Aldi Foods Pty Ltd v Moroccanoil Israel Ltd
[2018] FCAFC 93
Jamsek v ZG Operations Australia Pty Ltd
[2020] FCAFC 119
Aldi Foods Pty Ltd v Moroccanoil Israel Ltd
[2018] FCAFC 93