case a - The case for the daughter

case b - The case for the ex-wife, Ms L

• As a former spouse, my mother is only eligible to make an application for family provision out of my father's estate if she can demonstrate that my father had a moral obligation to make some provision for her.
• My mother and father's relationship ended almost a quarter century ago and their financial settlement was a "clean break". It took into account that my mother's earning capacity was less than my father's and that she would have ongoing care responsibilities for me. Although I lived with my mother, my father always complied with his child support obligations and also gave additional financial support over and above his legal responsibilities.
• For the last 24 years of my father's life, my mother's attitude towards him was one of relentless persecution as she pursued her stated aim of making his life a misery. My mother also refused to let my father see me unless he paid ever increasing amounts of child support. Once, she even accused him of planning to kidnap me and sought an apprehended violence order against him. The proceedings were dismissed and my father described these events as "deeply humiliating". My mother once wrote to my father that unless he paid my university fees, she would "personally make what is left of [his] wretched life not worth living".
• My mother's financial problems were partly attributable to her pursuit of costly and unsuccessful legal proceedings against my father, including an unsuccessful claim for damages for breach of professional duties.
• My mother claims that the circumstances of the break up of her marriage to my father caused her psychiatric disabilities which have impaired her ability to gain employment. However, the only evidence she has provided to support this are psychiatric reports that are over 20 years old. There is also no evidence that my mother suffered from any psychiatric condition at the date of the hearing.
• Given the "clean break" after my parents' separation and my mother's behaviour towards my father, my father did not owe a moral obligation to make provision for her. The court must overturn the trial judge's decision.

• Under succession law, a family law settlement does not preclude me from making a family provision claim, and my ex-husband still had a moral obligation to make provision for me.
• When the Family Court divided up our assets, the judge assumed that I would complete my university studies and secure employment. This did not eventuate. My care responsibilites towards our daughter precluded me from securing employment until 2000, at which time I was in a motor vehicle accident that prevented me from working subsequently.
• After the family law settlement, my ex-husband accumulated the substantial assets which ultimately became his $5 million estate. He was only able to do this because I raised our daughter all on my own, with minimal involvement from him.
• He also caused the circumstances of need that I find myself in. His conduct during our relationship and our marriage breakdown left me with deep psychological scars that have impaired my mental functioning. For example, he engaged in inappropriate sexual conduct towards me while I was a patient, for which the NSW Medical Board made a finding of professional misconduct against him.
• Although the psychiatric reports before the court are old, they establish that my ex-husband's conduct caused me to develop a psychiatric illness that disabled my mental functioning. As the psychiatrist opined, my ex-husband was in a position of power and authority over me and the trauma experienced by me "is thus much more complex and qualitatively different from the trauma of a normal marriage breakdown since it represents a betrayal and an exploitation by a person in a fiduciary relationship".
• It's true that my behaviour towards my ex-husband was hostile, but this was caused by my psychiatric disabilities and should not preclude me from making a family provision claim.
• It was wrong of my ex-husband to leave everything to our daughter and nothing to me. There is something unbecoming about an arrangement under which I am left in circumstances of considerable need, reliant on a social security pension, whilst our daughter, whom I raised on my own, inherits in excess of $5 million.
• Given my husband's role in causing my position of need and the size of his estate, he had a moral obligation to make provision for me, and the court should dismiss my daughter's appeal.

So, which case won?

Cast your judgment below to find out