Family Provision Claim

Pseudonyms are used to protect the client's identity.

Lisa and Gerald married in 1998.

After their wedding, they enjoyed a six-week honeymoon in Italy, where Gerald introduced Lisa to his family and friends.

In 1999, the couple attended a Catholic festival. Lisa, a devout Roman Catholic, was deeply committed to her faith.

At the festival, a 14-year-old boy approached them. Gerald introduced him to Lisa as his godson. Over time, the same boy continued to appear at events with them. Eventually, Gerald revealed the boy was in fact his son, Louis.

This revelation was difficult for Lisa to accept, especially in light of her religious values. However, she remained committed to making the marriage work. Lisa had always hoped to have children, but Gerald was firmly against having more.

In 2001, during an eight-week trip to Italy, Gerald disclosed that he had another child, William, living in Queensland.

Gerald had two sons from previous relationships: Louis and William, who were later named as the defendants in this case.

Lisa was devastated. Until then, she believed that she and Gerald shared the same Catholic values.

Throughout their marriage, Lisa shouldered the majority of the financial burden. She paid the mortgage and supported their household expenses. While they shared responsibility for bills such as strata, electricity, and water, Lisa also handled all domestic duties, including cooking, cleaning, and shopping.

In 2003, Lisa discovered Gerald had been unfaithful. She chose to separate from him, though her religious beliefs prevented her from pursuing a divorce. They separated finances, and the separation lasted from March 2003 to early 2004.

Determined to repair the marriage, Gerald made continuous efforts to reconcile. Following guidance from her priest, Lisa agreed to reunite, believing in the sanctity of their marital commitment.

After the reconciliation, Gerald appeared more involved with his children. Lisa believed Gerald’s children only visited when they sought financial support.

In 2011, Lisa’s father passed away. The loss was profound, and she leaned heavily on Gerald for emotional support.

In 2012, Gerald left his job as a builder and became a school crossing supervisor (“lollipop man”) without consulting Lisa. She became the primary income earner.

In 2017, Gerald was diagnosed with cancer. Chemotherapy led to a back fracture, and by 2019, his kidney function deteriorated, requiring dialysis.

In a meeting with a Solicitor during this time, Gerald clearly stated, “My wife should have everything.”

In 2020, due to COVID-19, Lisa worked from home and took on full-time caregiving responsibilities as Gerald’s condition worsened.

In 2021, Gerald was hospitalised. He refused further treatment despite Lisa’s pleas. She remained by his side, thanks to special exemptions allowing her presence amid COVID-19 restrictions. Gerald passed away in September 2021.

Lisa organised his funeral. Both sons attended. To her surprise, they immediately confronted her about collecting Gerald’s cars. Shocked by their approach, Lisa nevertheless allowed them to take the vehicles.

Later that year, Lisa was retrenched, adding financial strain to her grief.

She was devastated to learn that Gerald had left the majority of his estate to his children, with minimal provision for her. The reasoning behind this decision was unclear.

Since the funeral, Lisa has had no contact with Gerald’s children.