|
|
 |
Where am I now? Lawlink > Law Reform Commission > Publications > 8. Orders and Variation of Orders
Issues Paper 11 (1996) - Uniform Succession Laws: Family Provision
8. Orders and Variation of Orders
Testator’s family provision legislation details matters such as the contents of an order which the Court may make (from which beneficiaries’ shares in the estate the provision ordered must be made), the effect of an order, the variation of orders, and, occasionally, refers to inter-State matters. The provisions quoted below encapsulate the difficulties attending those seeking uniformity of the law, because they often differ considerably in the expression of the legislative intent without differing greatly in substance. To choose the best provision is likely, therefore, to be a subjective exercise, dictated by preference for one drafting style over another, one’s opinion concerning the appropriate amount of detail required, and perhaps merely a conviction that the legislation of one’s own State should be adopted for uniformity purposes unless there is a convincing demonstration of its inadequacy.
8.1 CONTENTS OF ORDER
Australian Capital Territory and Northern Territory
Section 11(1) of the Family Provision Act in each Territory1 provides:
(1) An order under section 8 or 9A [section 8] shall specify the amount and nature of the provision, if any, to be made [provision to be made] and may specify such conditions, restrictions and limitations subject to which the provision is to be made as the Court thinks fit to impose.
New South Wales
Section 11 of the Family Provision Act 1982 (NSW) provides:
(1) An order for provision out of the estate or notional estate of a deceased person (whether or not an order made in favour of an eligible person) may:
(a) require the provision to be made in any 1 or more of the following manners:
(i) by way of a lump sum;
(ii) by way of a periodic sum;
(iii) by way of specified existing or future property;
(iv) by way of an absolute interest, or a limited interest only, in property;
(v) by way of property set aside as a class fund for the benefit of 2 or more persons;
(vi) in any other manner which the Court thinks fit.
(b) be in respect of property which is situated in or outside New South Wales at the time of, or at any time after, the making of the order, whether or not the deceased person was, at the time of his death, domiciled in New South Wales;
(c) specify the manner in which a sum of money or other property is to be paid or made available to the person in whose favour the order is made.
(d) where provision is required to be made by way of a sum of money, specify that the whole or any part of the sum shall bear interest at such rate as the Court thinks fit for such period as the Court thinks fit; and
(e) be made subject to such conditions as the Court thinks fit.
Queensland
South Australia
Subsections 7(4),(5) and (6) of the Inheritance (Family Provision) Act 1972 (SA) provide:
(4) The Court may, in making any order under this Act, impose such conditions, restrictions and limitations as it thinks fit.
(5) If, in respect of an application under subsection (1) of this section, it appears to the Court that the matter would be more appropriately determined by proceedings outside the State, the Court may (without limiting the powers conferred on it by the preceding provisions of this section) refuse to make an order under this section or adjourn the hearing of the application for such period as the Court thinks fit.
(6) In making the order the Court may, if it thinks fit, order that the provision shall consist of a lump sum or periodic or other payments or a lump sum and periodic or other payments.
Tasmania
Section 9(1) of the Testator’s Family Maintenance Act 1912 (Tas) provides:
Victoria
Section 97(1) of the Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Vic) provides:
Western Australia
Subsections 6(3) and (4) of the Inheritance (Family and Dependants Provision) Act 1972 (WA) provide:
8.2 CLASS FUNDS
Detailed provisions respecting orders made in favour of a class of beneficiaries are found in States and Territories other than Queensland, South Australia and Victoria. The class funds envisaged appear to have as their factual focus the infant children of the deceased.
Australian Capital Territory and Northern Territory
Section 12 of the Family Provision Act in each Territory2 provides:
(1) Without limiting the powers of the Court under this Act, the Court may order that an amount specified in the order be set aside out of the estate of the deceased person and held on trust as a class fund for the benefit of two or more persons specified in the order in whose favour orders for provision out of the estate of the deceased person have been made.
(2) Where an amount is ordered to be held in trust as a class fund, the trustee of the fund shall invest so much of the amount as he does not apply in accordance with this subsection [sub-section] and may, subject to such directions or conditions as the Court gives or imposes, but otherwise as he thinks fit, apply the whole or any part of the income and capital of the fund for or towards the maintenance, education or advancement in life [for the benefit] of the persons for whose benefit the class fund is held, or any one or more of them to the exclusion of the other or others of them in such shares and in such manner as the trustee, from time to time, determines.
(3) Where one or more of the persons for whose benefit moneys are held in trust as a class fund dies, a reference in subsection [sub-section] (2) to the persons for whose benefit moneys are held in trust as a class fund shall, after the death of that person, be read as a reference to the survivor or survivors of those persons.
(4) Where an amount is set aside as a class fund, the administrator of the estate of the deceased person shall, unless the Court otherwise orders, be the trustee of the class fund.
New South Wales
Section 12 of the Family Provision Act 1982 (NSW) provides:
(1) Where the Court makes an order for provision requiring the provision to be made by way of property set aside as a class fund, it shall specify a trustee of the property so set aside.
(2) The trustee of property set aside as a class fund may, subject to such directions and conditions as the Court gives or imposes, but otherwise as he thinks fit, apply from time to time the whole or any part of the income and capital of the fund for or towards the maintenance, education or advancement in life of the persons for whose benefit the fund is held, or any one or more of them to the exclusion of the other or others of them, in such shares and in such manner as the trustee, from time to time, determines.
Tasmania
Section 10 of the Testator’s Family Maintenance Act 1912 (Tas) provides:
(1) Without prejudice to the powers conferred on the Court or a judge under any other provision of this Act, the Court or a judge may order that any amount specified in an order made on an application under subsection (1) of section three shall be set aside out of the estate to which the order relates and held on trust as a class fund for the benefit of two or more persons specified in the order (being persons who are entitled under section three A to make an application under that subsection).
(2) Where an amount is ordered to be held on trust as a class fund for any persons, pursuant to this section, that amount shall be invested, and the trustee may-
(a) in his discretion but subject to such directions and conditions as the Court or judge may give or impose, apply the income and capital of that amount, or so much thereof as the trustee from time to time thinks fit, for or towards the maintenance or education (including past maintenance or education provided after the death of the deceased person), or the advancement or benefit, of those persons or of any one or more of them to the exclusion of the other or others of them, in such shares and proportions, and generally in such manner, as the trustee thinks fit; and
(b) so apply the income and capital of that amount notwithstanding that only one of those persons remains alive.
(3) For the purposes of this section, the expression “trustee” means the executor or administrator of the estate of the deceased person unless the Court or judge appoints any other trustee (whether by the order creating the class fund or subsequently), in which case it means the trustee so appointed.
(4) If the trustee is not the executor or administrator of the estate of the deceased person, the Court or judge may give such directions as it or he thinks fit relating to the payment to the trustee of the amount that is to be held on trust as a class fund, and may exercise any power conferred on the Court by section forty-seven of the Trustee Act 1898, either on the creation of the class fund or at any time during the continuance of the trusts thereof.
Western Australia
Section 13 of the Inheritance (Family and Dependants Provision) Act 1972 (WA) provides:
(1) The Court may, if it thinks fit, order that an amount specified in the order shall be set aside out of the estate and held on trust as a class fund for the benefit of two or more persons specified in the order, being persons for whom provision may be made under this Act.
(2) Where an amount is ordered to be held on trust as a class fund for any persons under subsection (1) of this section, that amount shall be invested and the trustee may at his discretion, but subject to such directions and conditions as the Court may give or impose, apply the income and capital of that amount, or so much thereof as the trustee from time to time thinks fit, for or towards the maintenance, support or education (including past maintenance, support or education provided after the death of the deceased) or the advancement or benefit of those persons, or any one or more of them to the exclusion of the other or others of them in such shares and proportions and generally in such manner as the trustee from time to time thinks fit; and may so apply the income and capital of that amount notwithstanding that only one of those persons remains alive.
(3) For the purposes of this section the term “trustee” means the Administrator, unless the Court appoints any other trustee, whether by the order creating the class fund or subsequently, in which case it means the trustee so appointed.
(4) If the trustee is not the Administrator, then the Court may give such directions as it thinks fit relating to the payment to the trustee of the amount which is to be held on trust as a class fund and may exercise any power under section 89 of the Trustees Act, 1962, either on the creation of the class fund or from time to time during the continuance of the trusts thereof.
Issues for consideration
These provisions are all of a very similar import but the wording varies between them. It may be possible to abridge the provision substantially. It is unlikely that the Courts in jurisdictions where there is no similar provision cannot create by order appropriate trusts for classes of beneficiaries. The language of the provisions derives from traditional trust precedents and is perhaps not as broad as it might be. For example, the insistence of the legislation that the person or persons the beneficiaries of the class fund must be specified, rather than described as a class, could place an unnecessary limitation on the order, for instance if there were a member of the class not known about at the time of the making of the order, for instance a child believed to be dead, or an illegitimate child of whose existence the legitimate children of the deceased were unaware. A larger issue is whether such detailed provisions are needed. It might be that the legislation should be expressed in detailed terms, or that it might be expressed in much shorter, more abstract, terms.
8.3 WHICH BENEFICIARIES’ SHARES MUST BEAR THE BURDEN OF THE ORDER?
The legislation refers to which beneficiaries’ shares must bear the burden of any order made.
Australian Capital Territory and Northern Territory
Subsections 11(2) and (3) of the Family Provision Act in each Territory3 provide:
(2) Unless the Court otherwise orders, the burden of the provision ordered by the Court to be made for the benefit of a person shall, subject to subsection (3) [sub-section (1)] be borne between the persons beneficially entitled to the estate of the deceased person (other than the person or persons in whose favour an order or orders under this Act is or are made), in proportion to the values of their respective interests in the estate.
(3) Where persons are successively entitled to estates or interests in any property that is settled by the will of the deceased person, those estates and interests shall not, unless the Court otherwise orders, be valued separately but the proportion of the provision required by subsection [sub-section] (2) to be borne by those persons out of those estates and interests shall be raised or charged against the corpus of that property.
Section 15 goes on to provide:
(1) The Court may, when making. or at any time after having made, an order under section 8 or 9A [section 8 or at any time after having made an order under that section,] order a person who is entitled to a share in the estate of the deceased person as a legatee, devisee or beneficiary to pay a lump sum or periodical payments, or a lump sum and periodical payments, to represent, or in commutation of, such proportion of the provision ordered to be made for the person in whose favour the order is made as falls upon the legatee, devisee or beneficiary, and may exonerate the property or a specified part of the property to which the legatee, devisee or beneficiary is entitled from further liability in respect of that provision.
(2) Where the Court makes an order under subsection [sub-section] (1), the Court may direct -
(a) the manner in which a lump sum or periodical payment is to be secured;
(b) the person to whom such a lump sum or periodical payment is to be made; and
(c) in what manner, if any, the lump sum or periodical payment is to be invested for the benefit of the person in whose favour the order under section 8 or 9A [section 8] has been made.
New South Wales
Section 13 of the Family Provision Act 1982 (NSW) provides:
13. Where the Court makes an order for provision out of the estate of a deceased person it may specify the beneficial entitlements in that estate which shall bear the burden of that provision and, in relation to each of those entitlements, the part of the burden which it shall bear.
Queensland
Subsections 41(3),(4) and (5) of the Succession Act 1981 (Qld) provide:
(3) The incidence of the payment or payments ordered shall, unless the Court otherwise directs, fall rateably upon the whole estate of the deceased person or upon so much thereof as is or may be made directly or indirectly subject to the jurisdiction of the Court.
(4) The Court may, by such order or any subsequent order, exonerate any part of the estate of the deceased person from the incidence of the order, after hearing such of the parties as may be affected by such exoneration as it thinks necessary, and may for that purpose direct the personal representative to represent, or appoint any person to represent, any such party.
(5) The Court may at any time fix a periodic payment or lump sum to be paid by any beneficiary in the estate, to represent, or in commutation of, such proportion of the sum ordered to be paid as falls upon the portion of the estate in which the beneficiary is interested...
South Australia
Subsections 9(2) and (3) of the Inheritance (Family Provision) Act 1972 (SA) provide:
(2) Subject to subsection (3) of this section and unless the Court otherwise orders, the burden of any such provision shall, as between the persons beneficially entitled to the estate of the deceased person, be borne by those persons in proportion to the values of their respective interests in the estate.
(3) Where the deceased person died leaving a will under which two or more persons are successively entitled to any property, the successive interests shall not, unless the Court otherwise orders, be separately valued for the purposes of subsection (2) of this section, but the proportion of the provision to be borne by that property shall be raised or charged against the corpus thereof.
Tasmania
Section 10A of the Testator’s Family Maintenance Act 1912 (Tas) provides:
(1) The incidence of any payment directed to be made by an order under this Act shall, unless the Court or a judge otherwise orders, fall ratably upon the whole estate of the deceased person, or, where the authority of the Court does not extend or cannot be made to extend to the whole estate, ratably upon such part of the estate as is subject to the authority of the Court.
(2) The Court or a judge may exonerate any part of the estate of a deceased person from the incidence of an order under this Act, after hearing such of the parties who may be affected by the exoneration as the Court or judge thinks necessary, and may, for that purpose, direct any executor or administrator to represent, or appoint any person to represent, any of those parties.
(3) The Court or a judge may, at any time, fix a periodical payment or lump sum to be paid by any beneficiary in the estate of the deceased person to represent, or in commutation of, such proportion of the sum ordered to be paid as falls upon the portion of the estate in which that beneficiary is interested, and may exonerate that portion from further liability, and may direct in what manner the periodical payment shall be secured, and to whom the lump sum shall be paid, and in what manner it shall be invested for the benefit of the person to whom the commuted payment is payable.
Victoria
Section 97(2) of the Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Vic) provides:
Western Australia
Subsections 14(2) and (3) and section 17 of the Inheritance (Family and Dependants Provision) Act 1972 (WA) provide:
14.(2) Subject to subsection (3) of this section, and unless the Court otherwise orders, the burden of any provision shall, as between the persons beneficially entitled to the estate of the deceased, be borne by those persons in proportion to the value of their respective interests in such estate.
(3) The estates and interests of persons successively entitled to any property which is settled by the will of a testator shall not, for the purposes of this section, be separately valued, but the proportion of the provision to be borne by such property shall be raised or charged against the corpus of such property.
17. Where the burden of any provision ordered to be made falls upon the portion of the estate to which any person would, apart from that order, be entitled under the will or on intestacy, the Court may determine that a periodic payment or a lump sum shall be set aside or appropriated to represent or in commutation of such proportion of the provision ordered to be made as falls upon that portion of the estate, and thereupon -
(a) the Court may exonerate such portion from all or any further liability;
(b) the Court may direct in what manner the periodic payment shall be secured and to whom any lump sum shall be paid;
(c) the Court may give directions as to the manner in which any moneys accruing shall be invested for the benefit of the person in whose favour the provision is made.
Issues for consideration
It is arguable that some of the provisions quoted above are over lengthy and perhaps reflect very particular issues which preoccupied the minds of the legislators concerned with the legislation in its early days. For instance, life interests are probably not found as often these days as they used to be, and it may be the case that orders against life tenants and remaindermen are so infrequent that it is hardly worth making a specific provision for the apportionment between them of the burden of the order; the Court could be given power expressed in sufficiently general language to cover that and other cases.
It could also be argued that there is no real need any longer to include a provision that the burden, unless the Court otherwise orders, be borne proportionately by beneficiaries. These provisions were inserted into the legislation in early years in order to counter Court decisions in New Zealand,4 that the burden of the order should fall on the residue of the estate. The statutory rule involves valuing the share of every beneficiary; and so it is unlikely to be a rule which is applied often. Perhaps a better way of approaching the matter would be to require the Court to attend to all such matters in its order. Existing provisions about the effect of a Court order seem to imply that the order must attend to the entire scheme of benefits created by any will, intestacy and order.
8.4 EFFECT OF ORDER
All jurisdictions except Queensland now contain provisions as to the effect of the order.
Australian Capital Territory and Northern Territory
Section 16 of the Family Provision Act in each Territory5 provides:
(1) Subject to subsection [sub-section] (2), an order under section 8 operates as if it were a codicil to the will of the deceased person executed by the deceased person immediately before his death.
(2) An order under section 8 in relation to property of a deceased person who dies intestate operates as a modification of the provisions of Division 3A of Part III of the Administration and Probate Act 1929 [Division 4 of Part III of the Administration and Probate Act] in their application to that property.
New South Wales
Section 14 of the Family Provision Act 1982 (NSW) provides:
Comment
Subsection (2) draws attention to the rules which govern out of whose testamentary benefits creditors of a testator are to be paid. For instance, if a testator devises mortgaged property, the making of a family provision order with respect to that property could not adversely affect the lender’s security interest in that property. It is hard to see how a family provision order could affect a secured or an unsecured creditor’s rights.
South Australia
Section 10 of the Inheritance (Family Provision) Act 1972 (SA) provides:
Victoria
Section 97(4) of the Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Vic) provides:
Western Australia
Section 10 of the Inheritance (Family and Dependants Provision) Act 1972 (WA) provides:
Every provision made by an order shall, subject to this Act, operate and take effect either as if the same had been made by a codicil to the will of the deceased executed immediately before his death or, in the case of intestacy, as a modification of the applicable rules of distribution.
8.5 PROBATE AND LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION
In some jurisdictions it is provided that a certified copy of the order is endorsed on or annexed to the probate of the will or letters of administration.6
8.6 ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
It is interesting that Queensland does not have this provision. It is sometimes said that the jurisdiction does not enable the Court to make a new will for a person. The provisions quoted may give the superficial appearance that the Court can make a new will; but it is clear that the order which the Court may make is constrained by many factors. However the provision represents a convenient way of encapsulating the Court’s order in the context of any will or intestacy. The jurisdictions differ in the context of intestacy in that the effect of the order in some of them is that a will is created, but in others that the intestacy rules are varied. It is doubtful whether this difference in wording is of practical significance, although some may perceive one as jurisprudentially more justifiable than the other. The will approach arguably imposes a fiction.
8.7 VARIATIONS OF ORDER
All the enactments include provisions about varying orders. The inherent difficulty is that a power to vary can be seen as trenching against the desirability of settling the distribution of the estate once and for all in the one process. On the other hand, a person entitled to an ongoing benefit, such as a periodical payment, may, after a time, become possessed of other means so that the order for periodic payment might justifiably be varied, suspended or discharged; or, if the person’s circumstances have changed for the worse, the person may need to seek additional provision.
Australian Capital Territory
Section 9A of the Family Provision Act 1969 (ACT) provides in part:
Subsection (3) enables the Court to increase a benefit where the previous provision was by way of periodical payments or the benefit of the investment of a lump sum.
A provision dealing specifically with the variation of orders has been repealed, although it is retained in the almost identical Northern Territory legislation.7
New South Wales
Section 19 of the Family Provision Act 1982 (NSW) provides in part:
(2) ...the Court may, by order, revoke or alter an order for provision in favour of a person made in respect of property in the estate or notional estate of a deceased person so as to allow an order for provision to be made under this Act in favour of another person wholly or partly in respect of all or any of that property.
(4) Where an order for provision is revoked or altered pursuant to section 9(6) [which enables the Court to make interim orders] or subsection (2) or (3) or is altered pursuant to section 30 [which provides for an alteration where property is offered in substitution for property or notional property of the estate], the Court may:
(a) revoke or alter any other orders made by it as a consequence of, or in relation to, the order to such extent as may be necessary as a result of the revocation or alteration; and
(b) make such additional orders (other than an order for provision) as may be so necessary.
Additional provision
In New South Wales section 8 of the legislation makes specific provision enabling an eligible person for whom provision has been made, to seek additional provision if there has been a “substantial detrimental change” in that person’s circumstances.
Northern Territory
Section 17 of the Family Provision Act 1970 (NT) provides in part:
(1) ...the Court may, at any time and from time to time ... discharge, vary or suspend an order made by it under section 8 or any other order made by it under this Act.
(2) Where the Court has ordered periodical payments, or has ordered that a lump sum be invested for the benefit of a person, the Court may, if it is satisfied ... that the person for whose benefit the order was made has otherwise become possessed of or entitled to means for his proper maintenance, education or advancement in life, discharge, vary or suspend its order or make such other order as is just in the circumstances.
(3) An order shall not be made under sub-section (1) increasing a provision made by an order under this Act.
Queensland
Section 42 of the Succession Act 1981 (Qld) is even more comprehensive:
(1) Where ... the Court has ordered a periodical payment or has ordered any part of an estate or a lump sum to be invested for the benefit of any person, it may from time to time ... inquire whether any party deriving benefit under the order is still living or has become possessed of or entitled to provision for the party’s proper maintenance or support and into the adequacy of the provision, or whether the provision made by the order for any such party remains adequate, and may increase or reduce the provision so made or discharge, vary or suspend the order, or make such other order as is just in the circumstances:
(1A) However, the Court shall not increase the provision so made unless the income of the estate or, as the case may be, the capital or income of the part of the estate or lump sum invested for the benefit of the person concerned in pursuance of the original order is considered by the Court to be sufficient for the purposes of such increase and all other lawful payments (if any) therefrom.
(2) Without derogating from the provisions of subsections (1) and (1A), where the Court has increased the provision so made for the benefit of any person and at any subsequent date the income of the estate, or, as the case may be, the capital or income of the part of the estate or lump sum invested for the benefit of the person concerned is considered by the Court to be insufficient for the purposes of such provision and all other lawful payments (if any) therefrom, the Court may reduce or suspend any increase or discharge, vary or suspend the original order, or make such other order as is just in the circumstances.
Comment
This provision gives an idea of the sorts of factual situations which may require a Court to vary an order. The setting appears to be that of a fund set aside in a previous order to meet the needs of one or more persons, probably the widow or infant children of the deceased. Nevertheless, it is very lengthy in comparison with the South Australian provision.
South Australia
Section 9(5) of the Inheritance Family Provision Act 1972 (SA) provides:
The Court may at any time, and from time to time, on the application of the administrator or of any person beneficially entitled to or interested in any part of the estate of the deceased person, rescind or alter any order.
Section 12 provides:
Where the Court has ordered periodic payments, or has ordered a lump sum to be invested for the benefit of any person, it shall have power to inquire whether at any subsequent date the party benefited by the order has otherwise become possessed of, or entitled to, provision for his proper maintenance, education and advancement, and into the adequacy of that provision, and may discharge, vary or suspend the order, or make such other order as is just in the circumstances.
Tasmania
Subsections 9(5) and (5A) of the Testator’s Family Maintenance Act 1912 (Tas) provide:
(5) The Court or a judge may, at any time, on the application of the executor or administrator of the estate of a deceased person or of any person who is beneficially entitled to, or interested in, any part of that estate -
(a) rescind any order making any provision under this Act out of that estate or any part thereof; or
(b) alter any such order by increasing or reducing the amount of any provision made thereby or by varying such order in such manner as the Court or judge thinks proper.
(5A) The Court or a judge shall not, in the exercise of the power conferred on it or him by paragraph (b) of subsection (5) of this section, alter an order under this Act so as to disturb a distribution of any part of the estate that was lawfully made before the making of the application for the alteration.
Victoria
Section 97(5) of the Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Vic) provides differently:
(5) The Court may at any time and from time to time on the application by motion of the executor or administrator of the testator’s estate or of any person beneficially entitled to or interested in any part of the estate of the testator rescind or alter any order making provision for any widow widower or child....
Western Australia
Sections 15 and 16 of the Inheritance (Family and Dependants Provision) Act 1972 (WA) make separate provision for the rescission or suspension or reduction of an order (section 15) and the increase of an order (section 16). They provide:
15.(1) On the application by or on behalf of-
(a) the Administrator;
(b) any person beneficially entitled to or interested in the estate of the deceased; or
(c) a person for whom provision may be made under this Act,
and having regard to the hardship that would be caused to any person taking benefit under the order and to all the circumstances of the case, the Court may rescind or suspend any order, or reduce the provision made under it....
16.(1) Where it would not be inequitable to grant relief having regard to all possible implications in respect to other persons, and an application for increased provision is made by or on behalf of a person in respect of whom an order has been made under this Act on the ground that since the date of that order circumstances have so changed that undue hardship will be caused if increased provision is not made, the Court may make an order for increased provision.
Issues for consideration
With respect to the discharge, variation and suspension of orders the above quoted provisions differ in drafting and detail and are preoccupied sometimes by different considerations. It is difficult to resist the temptation to suggest that to a certain extent some of these provisions are over stated and that a more general power to vary, discharge, suspend, increase and decrease provision already made could be conferred on the Court, as in South Australia, without detailed constraints. It is significant that in the Australian Capital Territory the detailed variation power has been repealed. The Court, if given a general power, would be unlikely to exercise it except within the general purpose of the Act, and would have greater freedom to move with the times and to try different formulae of provision.
FOOTNOTES
1. Family Provision Act (1969) (ACT); Family Provision Act (1970) (ACT).
2. Family Provision Act 1969 (ACT); Family Provision Act 1970 (NT).
3. Family Provision Act 1969 (ACT); Family Provision Act 1970 (NT).
4. Viz Parker v Carr (1905) 24 NZLR 895 and Plimmer v Plimmer (1906) 9 Gaz LR 10.
5. Family Provision Act 1969 (ACT); Family Provision Act 1970 (NT).
6. See Family Provision Act 1969 (ACT) s18; Family Provision Act 1970 (NT) s18; Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Vic) s97(3); Inheritance (Family and Dependants Provision) Act 1972 (WA) s14(4).
7. Section 17 of the Family Provision Act 1969 (ACT) was repealed by s15 of the Family Provision (Amendment) Act 1981 (ACT) (No 38 of 1981). The Northern Territory legislation is set out below at 71.
|
