In this episode of De Groots with DeGroots, Tony Skinner speaks with Elizabeth Lorimer about estrangement in family provision applications.
Elizabeth explains that estrangement is a factor the court may consider, but it is not an automatic barrier to a claim.
The discussion covers how courts assess need, the difference between estrangement and disentitling conduct, why family provision cases are highly fact-specific, and why simply leaving someone out of a will does not guarantee they cannot make a claim.
The episode also looks at practical considerations for will makers, including the importance of documenting reasons for unequal provision and understanding how courts may treat long-term family breakdowns.
Estrangement can be relevant in a family provision application, but it is only one factor among many. The court will still consider the size of the estate, the applicant’s need, competing claims, and the relationship between the applicant and the deceased.
Elizabeth notes that many family provision applications settle at mediation, particularly in Queensland where mediation is mandatory. Even so, lawyers still need to prepare the case as if it may ultimately be heard by the court.
A central issue in family provision law is whether the applicant has been adequately provided for. The applicant’s financial need is often the critical factor. Without need, the court may not have power to make further provision.
Elizabeth explains that estrangement may involve a long breakdown in the relationship, lack of contact, distance, or family conflict. Disentitling conduct is much more serious and may involve violence, serious theft, abuse, or other gross behaviour.
Elizabeth is clear that there is no foolproof way to exclude a child from making a family provision claim. A child’s eligibility remains, even where there has been long-term estrangement. Leaving a reason in the will or a separate document may help provide context, but it is not a guarantee
