PROVISION MADE FROM ESTATE

Press, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 26211, 7 September 1950, Page 3

PROVISION MADE FROM ESTATE

CLAIM BY ADOPTED DAUGHTER

This is one of the most obvious cases where the Court is properly invoked ’ said Mr Justice Northcroft, after hearing a claim in the Supreme Court yesterday by Hinemoa Natischa McKeown, a widow, for provision from the estate of Albert Meredith Chivers, a retired hotelkeeper. w - Brown appeared for the plaintiff; Mr J. A. Wicks, for the trustees- Eric Andrew Cleland, a solicitor, ana Claude Aurelian Cooper, a woolbroker- and Mr T. A. Gresson, for Clara Matilda. Chivers, widow of the testator. Mr Brown said that the claim was made under the Family Protection Act by an adopted daughter. The plaintiff and the widow of the testator, now aged 79, were the only two persons concerned. The testator made a will on June 18, 1928, leaving his widow as sole beneficiary. He died on May 21, 1949. The net balance of the estate was £5871. The balance now held by the trustees was £2319, of which £319 was cash and the rest in fixed deposit. No provision had been made at all for the plaintiff. Mr Gresson said that the testator had been considerate and generous to the plaintiff during his lifetime. The Court should be slow to interfere in a case like this. His Honour said that out 0f£3500 the wjdow had already given away £l5OO to charities and relatives For the widow’s own sake it seemed necessary to do something. Indeed, it was approaching the sort of case that was brought before the Court under the Aged and Infirm Persons Act. It was ouite clear that the testator had a

moral duty to provide for the daughter and this could have been done without embarrassing his widow. It was unfortunate that more of the estate was not now available in the hands of the trustees for the widow seemed to have been giving it way in- rather fatuous fashion. His Honour made an order that the f testator’s widow have a life interest h in the balance of the estate. £2319, t with remainder to the plaintiff.