Treasure v Richardson

The case of Treasure v Richardson involves the plaintiff, Treasure, who sought a family provision order from the estate of her former de facto partner, Richardson. The dispute arose following the death of Richardson, who had continued to assist Treasure despite the termination of their relationship due to Treasure’s long-standing alcohol issues. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the plaintiff, who had been significantly affected by alcohol and whose relationship with the deceased had ended partly due to this dependency, was entitled to a family provision order under the Succession Act 2006 (NSW). The court needed to determine whether any factors justified granting the plaintiff a share of Richardson’s estate, despite the absence of a formal marriage or legal recognition of the relationship as a de facto partnership.

The court found that the plaintiff's dependency on alcohol, which played a substantial role in the breakdown of the relationship, was a critical factor. Additionally, although Richardson had continued to provide financial support to Treasure post-relationship, this did not create a sufficient basis for a family provision order. The court concluded that there were no compelling factors warranting an order in favour of the plaintiff. The court emphasised the importance of considering the circumstances of the relationship and the nature of the dependency when assessing such applications.

Consequently, the court dismissed the plaintiff's application, holding that there were no grounds to make a family provision order in her favour.