Described as erratic, impulsive and lacking empathy, Anne Brosnahan was warned by lawyers preparing her will that failing to properly provide for her only son would lead to litigation on her death. So it came to pass. The High Court ruled son Peter was entitled to half her $1.8 million estate.
Anne died in 2019. Nominated charities were bequeathed nearly half her estate, with other specific bequests to her sisters, a friend and three god-daughters. Two of Peter’s three children were gifted $200,000 each; the third child nothing. The remainder was left to Peter; approximately $620,000 the court was told, with further estate expenses likely to reduce this amount.
Peter, a Wellington barrister, claimed against his mother’s estate under the Family Protection Act. Successful claims require proof of failure to provide ‘proper’ support, breaching a moral obligation. Courts have interpreted ‘proper’ to mean the need to acknowledge family members existence and role in family life.
The court was told of Anne’s virtual abandonment of Peter as a child, acting with frequent indifference as to his needs and upbringing. This pattern of indifference continued on the death of Peter’s father; Peter was posted envelopes of unpaid invoices with demands they be paid. She was not always truthful. In one instance, invoices for extensions to a property were deliberately misdescribed as household maintenance. Invoices totalling well over $100,000 were paid on his mother’s behalf, the court was told. Peter was called in to smooth over differences arising between his mother and her neighbours and between her mother and tenants in properties she owned. Peter was left to pick up the pieces when his mother impulsively purchased properties, often against advice not to go ahead.
Justice Cull ruled an award of $950,000 better recognised the moral duty Anne owed her son. An award of $100,000 was also made to Peter’s third child, left nothing in the will. As a result, Peter and his children received two-thirds of the estate; gifts to others reduced as a consequence.
re Estate Anne Brosnahan – High Court (4.02.21)
21.027