CASE: In the estate of Giuseppe Pellegrino (deceased) [2025] ACTSC 421

So many questions in this case.

Can you disclaim an inheritance left to you in a Will? Yes.

Does the disclaimer have to be in writing? No.

If you refuse to respond to letters and email, and send back the inheritance cheque, does that constitute disclaiming your inheritance? In this case, yes.

If a person disclaims their inheritance, who does their share of the estate go to? ... that's a little tricky. Listen to the episode to find out.

CASE: Radecki & Fairbairn [2020] FamCAFC 307; Fairbairn & Radecki [2020] FCCA 1556

Fairbairn and Radecki started a relationship when both were in their 50s, had already acquired their own assets, and had their own children. A core element of their relationship was their agreement to always keep their finances separate.

However, when Fairbairn lost capacity and moved into a nursing home, Radecki refused to move out of her house. The house was Fairbairn's only assets and only if it was sold would she be able to pay the aged care accommodation bond.

Radecki, on the other hand, owned three properties in his own right. Yet despite that, he continued to live rent free in Fairbairn's house while what little savings she had were eaten away by aged care fees.

The NSW Trustee & Guardian, acting as Fairbairn's financial manager, started family law proceedings claiming that the relationship with Fairbairn and Radecki had ended.

But had it???

CASE: Wertheim v Perpetual Trustee Company Limited [2021] NSWSC 1229Relationship come in all forms. The nuclear family dynamic is declining in prevalence.

One form that is becoming increasingly common is the blended family, where you have spouses who have no children together, but have children from a previous relationship.

Later-life de facto relationships come with different concerns. For example, both parties will usually be older and will have accrued their own savings, superannuation, assets and property by the time their current relationship started. They may agree that they will continue to be financial independent, that throughout their relationship they won't intermingle their funds, they will each pay their own way, and, on their death, their estate will go to their respective children or their biological family.

This is a sensible and reasonable decision to make. But after death, can the surviving de facto go against that agreement to make a claim on the estate?

CASE: Rex Phillip Tory v Sarjit Kaur Tory [2007] NSWSC 1078

In 1986, Sarjit Tory owned real estate with her former brother-in-law Rex Tory. The land had great potential for rezoning and development.

Sarjit and Rex agreed that Rex would make the arrangements and applications for rezoning and they would share the costs equally between themselves.

However, twenty years later and the property had still not been approved for rezoning.

Rex was in financial difficulty. He wanted to give up on the development plan and just sell the property.

Sarjit, as co-owner, did not want to sell the property.

Rex applied to the Supreme Court to force the sale of the property.

CASE: Kids' Kinder Childcare Pty Limited v The Department of Education [2024] NSWDC 345

WARNING: Disturbing content; child abuse

Parents are entitled to expect that when they leave their children at a childcare centre, their children will be properly cared for. That did not occur at Jumpstart Childcare in Menai.

Kids' Kinder Childcare Pty Limited, operating as Jumpstart Childcare, pleaded guilty to several offences including subjecting children to unreasonable discipline, failing to protect a child from a hazard, and failing to ensure the safety and wellbeing of children at its service.

After receiving their sentence - an arguably not-so hefty fine - the sole director, Thomas Fanous, appealed against the severity of the sentence. On reviewing the facts, the appeal court agreed that the sentence needed to be appealed, but because it was too lenient and the fine was increased.

CASE: Estate MPS, deceased [2017] NSWSC 482; Smoje vForrester [2017] NSWCA 308

Miryana Smoje spent the last two years of her life dying slowly and in constant pain, from breast cancer and inadequate medical care, in a small hotel room in Frenchs Forest.

She died without a will and her closest relatives was her brother Neven. But before her estate worth about $2.25m could pass to Neven, there was a claim on the estate.

David Forrester applied for provision from the estate on the basis that not only had he been Miryana's carer for the last two years of her life, but also because he had been living with her in a close personal relationship at the time of her death.

Was he successful?

CASE: Flourentzou v Spink [2019] NSWCA 315

In 2012, Dianne and Mario Flourentzou purchased a property in Casula to live in with their three children.

Dianne's mother, Ricky Spink, contributed $165,000 towards the purchase and renovation of the Casula property on the understanding that she could live with them at the property for the rest of her life.

Within 3 years, relationships had soured and Ricky was kicked out of the family home.

Was there any way she could get her money back?

CASE: Croft v Sanders [2019] NSWCA 303

When Warwick Croft made his last Will in 2013, he was 82 years old and suffering from delusions. He believed that four of his daughters were scheming against him, that they worked in a brothel and were sending prostitutes to knock on his door late at night. He talking about seeing things in his backyard - a black panther, huge owls, and one of his daughters running down a fence.

Croft's Will left most of his $3 million estate to one of his six daughters, Anna. Two of the daughters, Leah and Esther, challenged the Will on the basis that their father lacked capacity when it was made.

The Court was required to determine to what extent Croft's Will was influenced by his delusions and what was a reasonable response to his daughters taking their mother's side in his divorce.