Sadiq v NSW Trustee and Guardian

[2016] NSWCA 62

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Succession
2. › Intestacy
3. › Entitlement to estate
4. › De facto partner
5. › Whether plaintiff was de facto partner of deceased at time of death
6. › Succession Act 2006 (NSW), s 111
1. Succession
2. › Family provision
3. › Eligibility
4. › De facto relationship
5. › Whether plaintiff was living in de facto relationship with deceased at time of death
6. › Succession Act 2006 (NSW), Ch 3, s 57(1)(b)
1. Appeal
2. › Standard of appellate review
3. › Findings of fact by trial judge
4. › Conflicting testimonial evidence
5. › Whether appellable error shown
6. › Credibility findings

Quick Take

An appellate court will not disturb a trial judge's findings of fact based on the weighing of conflicting testimonial and documentary evidence where the reasoning is measured and balanced, even where the trial judge did not find the unsuccessful party was deliberately giving false evidence. The paucity of documentary evidence supporting a claimed long-term de facto relationship, combined with inconsistencies in the claimant's evidence and the contrary evidence of neighbours and social workers, may be sufficient to defeat a claim to an intestate estate under s 111 of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW).