Verzar v Verzar

The appeal concerned a contest between the deceased's second wife, the respondent, and the deceased's adult son, the appellant, regarding applications made under the *Succession Act 2006* (NSW). The respondent, who had a child dependent on her, sought a family provision order. The primary judge had extended the time for the respondent to make her application and had found that adequate provision had not been made for her. The appeal was heard by Macfarlan, Meagher and Barrett JJA of the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the primary judge had erred in extending the time for the respondent's application for a family provision order, whether the primary judge had erred in being satisfied that adequate provision had not been made for the respondent, and whether the primary judge had erred in ordering that the costs of both the appellant and the respondent be borne by the appellant and paid out of his interest in the deceased's estate, pursuant to section 99 of the *Succession Act 2006*.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The reasoning of the primary judge on the question of adequate provision was upheld, and the primary judge's decision to extend time was also affirmed. The Court found no error in the primary judge's orders regarding costs. The appeal was dismissed with costs.