01/10/2026
In this week's case we open with a familiar refrain -
Family provision applications frequently follow a familiar pattern. A partly or wholly disinherited child of the deceased makes a claim on the estate of their late parent saying they had a wonderful, close and loving relationship with the deceased, to whom they were devoted and with whom they spent much time. The principal resisting child of the deceased, who lived with and took care of the deceased, disputes what their sibling says. The resisting child says their brother or sister (as the case may be) lived their own separate life and seldom visited or helped the deceased and they did not (contrary to what they say) have a close relationship with their parent. Regularly there is a question as to whether the deceased parent was invited to a wedding or birthday or some other occasion of the claimant child.
So what could go so wrong that the court ends up using the word unethical in relation to the legal team not once, but twice? We look at that in the weekly email for NSW Estate Lawyers, which has just gone out. If you would like to join the mailing list you will get the last email (so this one) when you join.