<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=1922199932060382&amp;ev=PageView&amp;noscript=1">

Accident

Facing challenges post-accident? Our dedicated team is here to guide you through, protecting your rights with compassion.

Knowledge

Read our latest articles, success stories or insights regarding your legal questions.

About Us

We provides focused advice and assistance to help you navigate through a wide range of family law issues.

Highlights

Awards and recognition, client testimonials, and key events that reflect the trust we’ve earned in our community.

By Honest Grace Legal | Succession Law | June 2025

This case summary reviews Thompson v Cyati [2024] QDC 205, a Queensland District Court decision concerning a family provision application, adult child claim, estate dispute, estranged relationship, testamentary freedom, financial need, and the assessment of proper maintenance and support under the Succession Act 1981 (Qld).

 

 

Case Subject

Daughter Denied Inheritance Fails in Family Provision Claim Against Father’s Estate   

 

Background: What Happened in Thompson v Cyati

The applicant brought a family provision application seeking part of her late father’s estate after being explicitly excluded from his will. Her sister, Julene Cyati, was the executor and sole beneficiary. The deceased had directed that the applicant repay a loan of nearly $200,000, with the will making no provision for her. The sisters had a long-standing strained relationship.

 

Key Legal Issues in the Family Provision Claim

  • Was the deceased's will inadequate in providing for the applicant's proper maintenance and support in circumstances where the applicant was not dependant on the deceased and had a previous strained relationship?   
  • What date should be used to assess the applicant’s financial needs and the estate's value? 
  • Should loans from the deceased to the applicant be included in the estate's valuation? 

What the District Court Decided

The court refused the application. It held that: 

  • The adequacy of provision is assessed as at the date of death. 
  • The outstanding amounts owed with respect to the loans did not formulate part of the value of the deceased estate.  
  • The deceased had clearly and consistently intended to exclude her due to their estranged relationship. 
  • There was no requirement for any provision from the estate for the applicant.  

Key Findings on Financial Need, Estrangement and Testamentary Freedom

  • Financial Position: At her father’s death, the applicant had assets worth around $1.94 million (mainly two properties), albeit with limited liquidity and low income. 
  • Relationship: The court found the applicant had a deeply fractured relationship with her father, marked by litigation, verbal abuse, and an absence of reconciliation. 
  • Testamentary Intent: The deceased's statutory declaration in 2016 and consistent will revisions showed a deliberate and reasoned decision to exclude the applicant. 
  • Credibility:  the applicant’s evidence was found unreliable in parts due to inconsistencies, lack of disclosure, and exaggerated claims. Some of the affidavits as sworn contained material irregularities. 

Outcome of the Application

The applicant's claim under the Succession Act 1981 (Qld) was dismissed. No provision was ordered from the estate. The court indicated it would hear the parties further regarding costs. 

 

Why This Succession Law Case Matters

This decision underscores: 

  • The importance courts place on testamentary freedom, particularly when an adult child is financially independent and estranged. 
  • That “need” alone is not enough - courts assess relationship dynamics and past conduct. 
  • The burden on applicants to prove genuine financial need and a worthy claim, especially when delayed or involving complex family histories. 
  • Procedural integrity and credibility are crucial in family provision applications. 

 

Source

https://archive.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2024/QDC24-205.pdf

 

FAQs

1. What was Thompson v Cyati [2024] QDC 205 about?

2. What did the District Court decide?

3. Why was the applicant excluded from the will?

4. Why did the applicant’s financial position matter?

5. What does this case show about adult child family provision claims?

How We Can Help You

Book an appointment or call us for expert legal help.

Latest Case Summary

Stay updated with fresh articles covering law in action, court decisions, and legal know-how.

Case Summary: Dwyer v Workers' Compensation Regulator [2025] QIRC 119
By Honest Grace Legal | Workers’ Compensation Law | Oct 2025 This case summary reviews Dwyer v Worke...
Read more
Case Summary: Cabato v Paltridge & Anor [2025] QDC 59
By Honest Grace Legal | Personal Injury Law | Sep 2025 This case summary reviews Cabato v Paltridge ...
Read more
Case Summary: Austin v Workers' Compensation Regulator [2025] QIRC 110
By Honest Grace Legal | Workers’ Compensation Law | Oct 2025 This case summary reviews Austin v Work...
Read more

Need Help? Submit an Enquiry

We're here to help. Submit an enquiry, and our expert team will reach out to you. With local expertise and a national network, you can rely on our experience.