The Succession Act 1981 (Qld) does not recognise all relationships when dealing with distribution in Intestate situations. This leads to unfair outcomes for those involved. This research inquiry will outline and explain the current law related to Intestacy in QLD. It will investigate conflicting interests on the issue, when dealing with distribution in intestate situations in QLD, through analysis and discussion of the impact of the present law on stakeholders. It will evaluate the application of the law in resolving the social issue associated with the distribution of estate by drawing conclusions based on research evidence. In Queensland, if you die without having a valid will it is considered that you have died intestate. Intestacy is outlined in Part 2 of the Succession Act 1981 (Qld) and primarily governs the distribution of the estate of the deceased person to the next of kin e.g. spouse, de facto, children, grandchildren. The rules do not classify in-laws or step parents as next of kin. According to the Act, an intestate means a person who dies and either does not leave a will, or leaves a will but does not dispose effectively of the whole or part of his or her property (section 5). The rules in this Act apply to the estate of any person who was living in Queensland at the time of their death and did not leave a will. These rules will also apply to any property that was not covered by a will. Different rules may apply in relation to property that is located outside Queensland or to property in Queensland that belonged to a person who lived elsewhere at the time of his or her death (Koodrin, 2012). It is also important to consider that if a deceased person has property outside of Queensland it may be dealt with different... ... middle of paper ... ...f] Queensland: Queensland Law Reform Commission. pp. 2 - 20. Available through: QLD Government http://www.qlrc.qld.gov.au/wpapers/wp37.pdf [Accessed: 2 Mar 2014]. Sampford, K. (1997). Reforming Queensland’s intestacy laws: the succession amendment bill 1997. [pdf] Brisbane: Available through: QUEENSLAND PARLIAMENTARY LIBRARY: Publications and Resources Section http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/explore/ResearchPublications/LegislationBulletins/lb0997ks.pdf [Accessed: 2 Mar 2014]. The Public Trustee (2014). Let’s talk about intestacy. [pdf] pp. 2-8. Available through: The Public Trustee https://www.pt.qld.gov.au/files/brochures/intestacy-brochure.pdf [Accessed: 2 Mar 2014]. Unknown Author (2014). Wills, estates & probate : Queensland : public : foolkit. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.foolkit.com.au/qld/public/wills-and-probate#h28 [Accessed: 2 Mar 2014].
Family law conflicts are seldom resolved by the most senior court in Australia, and if they reach that level of judicial consideration they will most likely involve difficult and complex constitutional concerns (Forrester & Griffiths, 2009). Similar to the scenario, Marion's case came before the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia in June 1990 raising the difficult issues surrounding the confusing area of parents and their children's rights (Harrison, 2009). The case brought to life the challenging issue of who may lawfully allow the sterilisation of an intellectually disabled teenage girl, and therefore brought the serious debate concerning family auto...
Horkan, Thomas. "Legislation That Complicates Dying." Eds. Gary McCuen and Therese Boucher. Hudson: Gary McCuen Publications, 1985. 69-72.
Palmer, the defendant, claimed that he has the right to the property according to the law because he was named the heir in the will (Riggs v Palmer). The plaintiffs, Mrs. Riggs and Mrs. Preston, however brought this action before the court to fight against this will, for they believed that Palmer should no longer be entitled to the property, which he so wrongfully gained. The objective of the statute is to address issues concerning wills so that testators could carry out their final wishes by passing their property off to their loved ones (Riggs v Palmer). This fact is what gave rise to different arguments from the majority to the dissenting judges. The issues were how to interpret the law rationally, and whether Palmer, who murdered his grandfather should be entitled to the property. The judges believed that although the law at that time did not address the issue of what would happen to the property in the event that the heir murdered the testator, to allow such a thing would never be the intention of legislators (Riggs v Palmer). Had legislators ever
McDonald, P 1984, Can The Family Survive? - Change in Australia, Discussion Paper no. 11, Australian Institute of Family Studies, accessed 10 April 2012 http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/dp11.html
12. Woodward, D. (ed), 1988, Government, Politics and Power in Australia, Longman Cheshire Pty Ltd, Sydney
In conclusion, the doctrine of precedent is valuable for society but shouldn’t always be followed blindly, as, “somewhere between the world of slavish obedience to past precedent and antagonism towards its rules, lies the real world of Australian law as it is practised in the courts” (M Kirby, 2006).
Bloy, Marjie. “Victorian Legislation: a timeline.” 13 August 2002. The Victorian Web. 14 Mar 2005. http://www.victorianweb.org/history/legistl.html
Legislation and case law has been evolving throughout history surrounding testamentary promises. The attitudes of the courts have ebbed and flowed towards claims testing the validity of a will. New Zealand was the first country in the commonwealth jurisdiction to enact a family protection act, the Testators Family Maintenance Act 1900. Although legislation has changed considerably since the incorporation of the first act, the central concept has remained essentially unchanged. There are three main statutes in New Zealand governing family protection and testamentary promises, Property (relationships) Act 1976, Law Reform (Testamentary Promises) Act 1949 and the Family Protection Act 1955. This essay will explore these statutes and the cases in which reflect the courts attitude towards these. The writer will critically analyse the “attack against testamentary freedom” from all sides.
“DIGEST OF LAW REFORM COMMISSION REFERENCES.” 90. Surveillance. 21.2 (2002). Surveillance: an interim report, 6 December 2001. http://www.agd.nsw.gov.au/lrc.nsf/pages/r98chp03/
The main features that are seen today are a direct repercussion of the events in the development of the Commonwealth Administrative Review Committee (Kerr Committee) 1971. This including the Ombudsman investigations and ARC oversight. Although there are slight variations of the state administration, they did however have the same starting point. The recommendations of The Kerr Committee produced the framework for judicial review, the Admin Appeals Tribunal, the Ombudsman, and the Admin Review Council. The KC marked the first comprehensive review of Commonwealth Administrative Law. It is the KC’s philosophy that administrative decision would be revisable by more than one body, with that, there is high emphasis place on the protection of citizens against the improper or corrupt use of the decision-making power. The suggestions that have been recommended have not yet been implemented, however, the principles of the KC form its basis. Coherency and cohesiveness should play a key role in administrative law. With that, external independent agencies should undertake reviews, although this is not always the case. A uniform national approach should take action and this does occur in some areas such as immigration, but this is not the case for the majority of cases. The KC did however, assist in the formation of the basic principles of Australian administrative law today correcting defective decisions, ensuring uphold rule of law. This adhering to the concept of accountability in administrative
Centre for the government of Queensland, 2014, The University of Queensland, Queensland, viewed 29 March 2014,
...002, ‘Preserving Culture in Federal Court Proceedings: Gender Restrictions and Anthropological Experts’ in Land, Rights, Law, Issues of Native Title, Volume 2, Issues Paper No. 15, May 2002. AIATSIS Native Title Research Unit, Canberra.
Chapter 6 focused on a recent development of “income management,” a measure which aims at controlling over recipients of certain family and welfare payments by quarantining those payments and restricting their usage only for the “priority needs” including foods, clothing, housing, and education. Through this measure, Aboriginal parents in specific Indigenous communities and other non-indigenous “bad parents” have been partly excluded from the category of “deserving.”
To conclude, it is clear that this process is one that deals with significant controversy. Society’s views on Queensland’s current surrogacy laws vary, however a majority believe that the legislation is fair and just, without violating the rights of any individuals. We live in a society that is changing rapidly, and although we may be moving away from traditional family values, we are moving into a new time where it will eventually have to be made acceptable, with this rising change in what is seen as a traditional family.
Irving, H 2014, A window onto our constitutional history, National Archives of Australia, Australia, viewed 19 April 2014,