Strang v Steiner

[2019] NSWCA 143

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Succession
2. › Family provision
3. › Provision for maintenance, education and advancement in life
4. › Adequacy of provision
5. › Whether exercises of discretion miscarried
6. › Whether amounts of additional provisions ordered should be reduced
7. › Succession Act 2006 (NSW), ss 59, 60
1. Succession
2. › Family provision
3. › Burden of provision
4. › Which beneficiaries should bear burden of additional provision
5. › Whether exercise of discretion miscarried with respect to allocation of burden
6. › Succession Act 2006 (NSW), s 65(1)(c)
1. Appeal
2. › Standard of appellate review
3. › Discretionary decisions
4. › Family provision orders
5. › Whether House v The King standard applies to findings under s 59(1)(c) of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW)
6. › Whether failure to give adequate reasons is error warranting appellate intervention without need to show manifest excess

Quick Take

Where a primary judge fails to give adequate reasons for a family provision order, that failure constitutes an error of reasoning analogous to the first category in House v The King, warranting appellate intervention without the need also to show that the provision ordered was manifestly excessive.