The Court dismissed a family provision application on three independent grounds: (1) the applicant was not the testatrix's 'spouse' at the date of death because their significant relationship under the Relationships Act 2003 (Tas) had ended approximately two months before death, notwithstanding 22 years of cohabitation and continued physical co-residence — the Court held that a significant relationship can be terminated unilaterally and that the testatrix's consistent post-separation conduct (severance of joint tenancy, statutory declaration, solicitor's letter demanding vacation, hospital records listing status as 'separated', and text messages rejecting reconciliation) objectively established the relationship had ended; (2) even if eligible, the applicant failed to demonstrate he was left without adequate provision, given his earning capacity of $3,000–$10,000 per week, his receipt of a $235,000 inheritance (exceeding the entire estate value of $228,663) which he spent on discretionary items, and his failure to provide reliable financial disclosure including tax returns, pay slips, or full bank statements; (3) the applicant's sustained family violence against the testatrix over the relationship and his haranguing of her about her estate while she was in palliative care constituted disentitling conduct under s 8 of the Act, assessed against community standards reflected in family violence legislation.
The full text is available to signed-in members.