Avsnitt
-
CASE: Pietsch and Secretary, Department of Social Services [2024] AATA 2678
In May 2020, Russell Pietsch was 70 years old and newly in love. His young bride Tresha was 18 years old and living in the Philippines.
But there was a bug in their budding romance. For 6 years Russell had been receiving the age pension at the single rate and now that he was in a relationship, his payments were cut.
Russell was not going to take this lying down! He appealed all the way to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
The key question for consideration was this: Was there any special reason why Russell should continue to receive the single age pension when he was not single?
-
CASE: Wallis v Rudek [2020] NSWSC 162; Wallis v Rudek (No 2) [2020] NSWSC 215
Yuri & Olga Wallis were in financial crisis. They were about to lose their house in Pennant Hills, Sydney.
The property was worth $950,000 but they owed $840,000 to the bank and they were unable to pay the mortgage.
They asked their daughter Suzanne to buy them out on the agreement that Suzanne and her family would live in the upstairs dwelling and they would live in the downstairs dwelling.
Suzanne stepped up to help. But Yuri was not a good neighbour. He prevented much needed repairs to the property, he invaded the upstairs space, and he verbally abused Suzanne's husband and children.
When Suzanne tried to evict them, her parents refused to leave.
-
Saknas det avsnitt?
-
CASE: Fiorenza v Fiorenza [2024] NSWSC 549
This case involves a dispute between Irene Fiorenza and her son Matthew Fiorenza over ownership of the property at 69 Amherst Street, Cammeray.
Irene had inherited the property from her late mother in 2016 and had let her son Matthew and his family live there rent-free. In 2018, she transferred a 10% interest in the property to Matthew.
In 2023, Irene asked Matthew to either begin paying rent or to leave the property. Instead, Matthew claimed that his mother had promised to give him the Cammeray property and made an application for the Court to transfer the property to him.
-
CASE: Rydzewski v Rydzewski [2024] NSWSC 802
Maria Rydzewski had 4 children: Kevin, Barbara, Danuta and Stan.
In July 2016, Danuta died and Maria (who was 91 years old at the time) was deeply affected by her daughter's death.
There became a rift in the family due to a dispute as to whether Stan had caused his mother to miss Danuta's funeral.
A year later, Maria transfers two properties to her daughter-in-law Jenny and one property to her granddaughter Krystina. The reason for the transfers? In gratitude for the care they provided her AND to prevent Stan from inheriting any share of the properties.
The transfers were done by a solicitor, Mr Ireland. Because Maria could not speak English, all of the instructions came from her translator, her daughter-in-law Jenny.
This case raised many questions, some that remained unanswered.
Did Stan cause his mother to miss Danuta's funeral?
Did Maria have capacity in 2017 when she transferred the properties?
Did she transfer the properties under influence or unconscionable conduct on the part of Jenny and Krystina?
Did Maria get adequate legal advice from her solicitor?
The answers to those questions would determine whether the property transfers would be voided.
-
CASE: Coss v Norman (No 2) [2021] NSWSC 1490
WARNING: disturbing content; suicide
David Henry Norman and Rodney James Coss ("James") had been in a relationship from 2012.
They had separated in May 2019, 4 months before David’s death.
In the 4 months before his death, David had made 4 Wills. The last Will left most of most of his estate to David's sister Fiona, but also left a gift worth about $200,000 to James.
After David's death, James applied for further provision from the estate, claiming that his relationship with David had not ended.
Did the relationship end? Or did they only have a fight?
-
CASE: Petrovski v Nasev; the estate of Janakievska [2011] NSWSC 1275
Vasilka Janakievska, also known as Vasa Janakievska, died on 29 May 2009 at the age of 87 years.
During her life she made two Wills – one in April 1999 and another in December 2004.
For many years leading up to the execution of the 2004 Will, Vasilka was harassed and threatened by her brother-in-law Alex Nasev. He was demanding that she leave her Erskineville house to him.
In 2004 Alex took Vasilka to see his solicitor and was present when Vasilka signed her last Will in which she left him the Erskineville house as well as half the residue of her estate.
It was only after Vasilka's death in 2009 that her family found out about the 2004 Will. They argued that the 2004 Will was invalid on the basis that it was done under Alex's influence and that it did not reflect Vasilka's true wishes.
-
CASE: Jenny Yang v FCS Business Services Pty Ltd [2020] FWC 4560
Can you make an unfair dismissal case when the employee handed in their signed resignation letter?
You can if the person resigned due to the conduct of the employer.
Jenny Yang was accused of spreading rumours at the office Christmas party. In an odd situation, all the staff were invited to a meeting to vote on whether they had heard Jenny spreading rumours.
Jenny denied spreading the rumours but was not believed. She signed the resignation letter that was put in front of her, and left.
Shortly after, she filed an unfair dismissal claim.
-
What is a de facto relationship? And can you be in a de facto relationship without even knowing?
CASE: PY v CY [2005] QCA 247
In 1997, PY and her son were living with CY in his house as a family unit. PY moved to the Sunshine Coast to look after her elderly parents, but CY planned to join her there as soon as he had sold his business.
The relationship eventually broke down and PY applied for a property settlement.
CY argued that there could be no family law property settlement because there had never been a de facto relationship.
CASE: Vaughan v Hoskovich [2010] NSWSC 706
Steven Hoskovich died on 17 November 2007. He was not married, had no children and did not leave a Will.His estate was worth $413,000.
Janet Vaughan claimed that she was Steven’s de facto spouse and was therefore entitled to the estate on intestacy.
Pauline Hoskovich was Steven’s mother. She claimed that there was no de facto relationship and if there was not, she would be entitled to the whole estate on intestacy.
Throughout their 14-year relationship, Steven and Janet maintained separate houses. Steven had even stated that he was not living with Janet because he did not want her to have the legal rights that a de facto partner would have.
-
Regina v Phillip Raymond Parkes [2006] NSWSC 331
WARNING: Disturbing content
In 2005, Grace Parkes was 84 years old and required full-time care. Of her three children, it was decided that her son Phillip would quit his job to care for her.
Only Phillip didn't want to become a full-time carer.
On the day before he was expected to resign from his job, Grace was murdered in her home.
Phillip very quickly became the prime suspect and confessed to killing his mother.
-
Bradley v Irvine; Irvine v Irvine [2024] NSWSC 727
Maxwell Charles James Irvine passed away on 3 May 2021.
His last Will allowed his de facto partner of 35 years (Dawn) to reside in the family home for the rest of her life. He left the residue of his estate to his sons Peter and Michael.
He left nothing to his 3 stepdaughters (Cynthia, Karen and Glennis). Maxwell had been estranged from his stepdaughters for over 20 years, since they accused him of sexual abuse.
Following a criminal trial, Maxwell was acquitted of all counts.
The stepdaughters made an application for provision from Maxwell's estate. The sexual abuse allegations were a relevant factor in determining their claim.
-
CASE: Irvine v Irvine [2008] NSWSC 592
In the middle of his ongoing legal battle with his sister Elizabeth over their late father's estate, Maxwell Irvine took some time to reconnect with his aunt Rosa.
Rosa was a 90 year old widow living alone in Orange and her only real asset of value was her house.
Within a year, Maxwell had convinced his aunt that Elizabeth had abandoned her and that Rosa needed to appoint him as her attorney and to leave her house to him and his two sons in her Will.
But you know, on second thought, Max decided why wait? He took Rosa to his solicitor to sign over her house to him and his two sons immediately.
Not long after the transfer was registered, Rosa realised what she had done and started legal proceedings to get her house back.
-
CASE: Dowling v Irvine [2005] NSWSC 531
When Verdun Irvine died in 1992, he left behind a large farming property in Toogong NSW known as Lowery.
Verdun's wife Enid was granted the right to live on the farm for the rest of her life. She did so, with her son Maxwell, and they continued the farming operations together.
When Enid died in 2002, the farm was supposed to be sold and the proceeds divided between Verdun's three children Maxwell, Elizabeth and Robert.
But that couldn't happen because Maxwell was refusing to leave the farm.
CASE: Irvine v Dowling [2021] NSWSC 119
Almost 30 years after Verdun's death and his children were still in dispute over the farm. Each of them wanted to keep the farm and buy it from their siblings.
They finally executed a written agreement in 2016 that the child who made the highest bid in writing could buy the farm. That was Elizabeth.
However, Maxwell argued that they had verbally agreed to change the written agreement and that Elizabeth had abandoned her bid.
In considering the sad and contentious circumstances of this decade long family feud, Justice Kunc formed the impression that Maxwell Irvine's approach was to reflexively oppose whatever Elizabeth proposed just to delay any sale.
Maxwell had continued to occupy and have full use of the farm since their father's death in 1992.
-
CASE: Anaya & Anaya [2019] FCCA 1048
After 46 years of marriage, Mr & Mrs Anaya decided to call it quits. They divorced when they were both in their 80s.
What caused the separation may be considered to be a simple financial transaction or the straw that broke the camel's back.
There was a lot to consider when deciding how to divide the matrimonial assets, including:
Whether to include a significant inheritance the wife had received earlier in the relationship; What weight to give to the husband's financial support to the wife's three children; How to treat significant financial losses when the wife was scammed TWICE post-separation; and What would be an appropriate settlement after the husband died in the middle of the proceedings.It as a sad and acrimonious end to a lengthy relationship and serves as an example of the careful balancing act required of the Family Law Courts.
-
CASE: McFarlane v McFarlane [2021] VSC 197
In 2015, Judith McFarlane signed over her house to her son Mark McFarlane in exchange for "natural love and affection".
The very next year, Judith moved into aged care and had no money to pay for her nursing home accommodation or care fees.
Transferring the house to Mark not only took away her main asset, but also caused her to lose her pension.
In 2018, the State Trustees acting for Judith took Mark to Court to try to get her house back. Not only that, but they also wanted compensation for the lost pension.
-
CASE: Estate El Chami; Habib v El Chami [2016] NSWSC 1208
For most of Elias El Chami's life he suffered from paranoid schizophrenia and was institutionalised several times.
His brother Salim had supported him for much of his life, but in the last 10 years they had no contact due to Elias' irrational behaviour.
When Elias was 92 years old he made his final Will leaving his entire estate to his friend Mr Habib. He had only known Habib for several months, but Elias stated he did not want to leave anything to his brother Salim, who he referred to as a 'scorpion'.
The question for the Court was whether Elias had capacity when he made his Will.
-
CASE: The State of Tasmania v Jassy Anglin and Michael Anglin (13 April 2015); Janet Lois Mackozdi (2018) TASCD 274
WARNING: Disturbing content
In the middle of winter, on 23 July 2010, Janet Lois Mackozdi was left to spend the night in an uninsulated shipping container. At the time, she was 77 years old and weighed only 40kg, she was frail and could not walk, she had dementia and had diminished mental capacity, she had flu like symptoms and was hallucinating. Overnight,the temperature in the shipping container dropped below minus 1 degree Celsius.
Janet did not survive the night.
At the time, Janet was in the care of her daughter Jassy Anglin and her son-in-law Michael Anglin. It was the Anglins who had decided that Janet would spend the night in the shipping container and were later charged with her death.
-
CASE: Estate of Shirley Gardner Bernengo v Leaney [2019] NSWSC 1324
Shirley Gardner Benengo died on 19 June 2017 without a Will, leaving an estate worth more than $3.5 million and a legal battle to see who would claim it.
There was no doubt that the person who had been closest to her was Juan Jose Bernengo, also known as Marco.
Marco had been Shirley's son-in-law for almost 20 years, up until the death of her daughter (his wife) Gaye-Marie in 2007.
But the question was - had Marco been Shirley's de facto partner at the time of her death?
Marco claimed that he and Shirley had grown close during Gaye-Marie's almost three year battle with brain cancer. After her death, they consoled each other and eventually started a relationship of their own. A relationship that continued until Shirley's death in 2017.
Shirley's nieces and nephews denied that Marco and Shirley had ever been in a de facto relationship. If they could disprove the relationship, then they would be in line to inherit Shirley's $3.5 million estate.
-
WARNING: Disturbing content; discussion of suicide.
CASE: Re Estate of Carrigan [2018] QSC 206
In 2017 a husband died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound. Just before his death, he had left a voice message on his friend's phone stating that he wanted his life insurance to be paid to his children ($3 million each) and the rest of his estate to his wife.
He then made a voice recording on a mini tape recorder stating the same thing.
Did either voice recording qualify to be an informal Will? Only one of them did. But why?
CASE: Re Estate of Wai Fun Chan [2015] NSWSC 1107
A video Will may seem like a great idea! So much more personal than a legal document full of undecipherable jargon and paragraphs that run on for pages.
But the legal hassle it creates!
Wai Fun Chan had made a written Will but only a few days later decided to update her Will via video recording.
First hassle was making the video into a more easily accessible format - a written document. A transcription had to be created and verified.
Second hassle was determining whether the video qualified as an informal Will. Could the video be legally upheld even though it didn't fulfil the requirements for a valid Will?
Third hassle was the involvement of a beneficiary in the creation of the video. Wai Fun left a larger share of her estate to her daughter Deborah in the video, and Deborah was also behind the camera making the video. Did the gift to her fail because she was a witness to the "Will"?
-
CASE: The Public Trustee of Queensland v The Public Trustee of Queensland & Ors [2014] QSC 47
WARNING: Disturbing content of suicide and death.
Francis Ward, who went by the name Frank, died in June 2009 as a result of a drug overdose. He left an estate worth about $140,000.
Two years before his death, Frank had made a homemade Will which appointed his friend Merin Nielsen as his executor and left his estate to Merin.
In 2012, Merin was convicted of having assisted Frank to commit suicide. It was Merin who travelled to Mexico to procure the drugs that resulted in Frank's death.
Merin sought leniency on the basis that Frank had a number of serious medical conditions and had an intense fear of becoming disabled.
Two significant questions for the Court were:
1. Was Frank's medical condition terminal or debilitating?
2. Were Merin's actions influenced by the inheritance he would receive on Frank's death?
-
CASE: Gill v Garrett [2020] NSWSC 795; Gill v Garrett (No 2) [2020] NSWSC 1473
Dr Bill Garrett was a brilliant medical scientist, who in the 1960s was one of the small team of Australians who developed ultrasound for monitoring pregnancies.
In 1996 an unlikely friendship formed between the good doctor and a man 30 years his junior, Jason Gill. They met at a pub in Paddington where Jason was the life of the party. He invited Dr Garrett to join his trivia team and they would frequently meet at the Pub to eat and drink, with the doctor footing the bill.
When Jason's lease expired in 2003, he moved with Dr Garrett. It was supposed to be a temporary arrangement but Jason eventually became Dr Garrett's carer.
However, the care Jason provided the ailing doctor was substandard at best and included drinking binges and episodes of night-wandering.
When Dr Garret died in November 2015, his children politely asked Jason to leave the house. He refused, claiming that the doctor had promised to give him his $2 million house.
Jason also made an application seeking provision from Dr Garrett's estate.
- Visa fler
