Thompson v The Public Trustee of New South Wales

In Thompson v The Public Trustee of New South Wales, the Supreme Court of New South Wales addressed a dispute concerning family provision under the Succession Act 2006 (NSW). The plaintiff, Thompson, sought a provision from the estate of a deceased individual on the basis of being the deceased's de facto partner. The defendant, The Public Trustee, contested Thompson's claim, denying his status as a de facto partner and arguing that he was not an eligible person under the statute. The court was required to determine whether Thompson's status as a de facto partner was substantiated, and if not, whether he qualified as an eligible person under the Act. Additionally, the court had to evaluate the factors warranting the making of the application, Thompson's financial and material circumstances, and whether he had been left without adequate provision for his proper maintenance and advancement. The court also needed to consider the delay in making the application and whether there was sufficient cause for this delay, as well as the competing claim of another beneficiary.

The court examined the evidence presented to ascertain Thompson's relationship with the deceased and whether it met the criteria for a de facto partnership. After assessing the evidence, the court concluded that Thompson did not qualify as a de facto partner but remained an eligible person under the Act. The court then proceeded to consider the financial and material circumstances of Thompson, weighing these against the competing claim of another beneficiary. The court also evaluated the delay in making the application and found that there was insufficient cause to excuse the delay. Given these findings, the court ultimately determined that Thompson had not been left without adequate provision for his proper maintenance and advancement. Consequently, the court dismissed Thompson's application for family provision.

In light of the findings, the court made orders dismissing Thompson's application for family provision from the estate of the deceased. The court did not find it necessary to make any provision for Thompson, given the competing claims and the overall financial circumstances of the estate. The decision underscores the stringent requirements for family provision claims, particularly the necessity for timely applications and the rigorous assessment of financial and relational circumstances.