Angius v Angius [2024] NSWCA 113
Bell CJ, Mitchelmore JA, Ball JA
The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal brought by Jenny Angius against a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales making an order for family provision under the Succession Act 2006 (NSW) in favour of Natalie Angius from the estate of the late John Angius.
John Angius died in January 2022. Under his last will, Jenny was the sole beneficiary and executor of his estate with an agreed value of approximately $30 million. Natalie, John’s granddaughter by his son Robert, applied for family provision on the basis that she was an eligible person to make a claim, there were factors warranting her application, and adequate provision for her proper maintenance, education, or advancement in life had not been made under John’s will. The primary judge made an order for provision in Natalie’s favour in the amount of $2,550,000.
Jenny appealed on three grounds: (1) Natalie was not an eligible person because she was not wholly or partly dependent on John at any particular time, (2) there were not factors warranting her application, and (3) the amount of provision ordered was excessive.
When Natalie was a child, following her parents’ separation, John paid funds owed by Robert to her mother Silvana. John also paid other amounts throughout Natalie’s childhood, including a payment amounting to a number of months of Robert’s child support obligations. As an adult, Natalie was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis and faced other health conditions. After her diagnosis, she visited John regularly and assisted him with administrative and household tasks. John supplemented Natalie’s income during periods when she was unable to work and provided money to assist with her treatment.
In 2012, before Natalie was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, John executed a will under which Natalie would receive $200,000 (indexed). Although he later executed a new will under which Natalie received nothing, he told her that the new will was a temporary measure to prevent Robert (who had inherited the whole of John’s ex-wife’s estate of $13 million) from inheriting any of John’s estate. In 2021, John met with a solicitor to give instructions to appoint Natalie as his joint attorney and guardian and discussed executing a will making provision for his grandchildren. John died before the appointments were finalised.
In dismissing the appeal, the Court held that Natalie was an eligible person because she was dependent on John, at least as an adult, due to his financial support following her multiple sclerosis diagnosis. The Court also held that the primary judge’s findings as to factors
This summary has been prepared for general information only. It is not intended to be a substitute for the
judgment of the Court or to be used in any later consideration of the Court’s judgment.
warranting and the amount of provision were open to his Honour on the evidence and were not affected by reviewable error. Source: Supreme Court website.
2.5 million of $30m is only 8.3%.