An adult son, David Chie, took his late mother’s estate to court because he felt the will she left behind didn’t give him enough to live on. His mother, Charmaine “Shirley” Chie, had left her house and caravan, worth about $2 million, to her other son, John Veale. David and his sisters were only left a small amount of cash. The situation got complicated because John passed away shortly after his mother, without a will of his own. This meant his estranged wife, Vicky Veale, was in line to inherit the bulk of the property. David argued he was in poor health, nearing retirement with not much super, and needed more from his mum’s estate to live properly. The court had to decide if Shirley’s will was unfair to David and whether Vicky’s financial situation, even though she wasn’t a direct beneficiary, should be considered. In the end, the judge agreed with David and awarded him $450,000 from the estate, deciding that his mother hadn’t made adequate provision for him, especially considering his needs and the size of the estate.
Key details of the case
- Case Number: 2023/430153
- Court: Supreme Court of New South Wales
- Judge: Williams J
- Hearing Dates: 2-3 June 2025
- Decision Date: 10 October 2025
- Plaintiff: David Keith Chie (the adult son making the claim)
- Defendant: Maria Victoria “Vicky” Veale (representing the estate, and the estranged wife of the main beneficiary)
- Deceased: Charmaine Mary Joan Chie, also known as “Shirley”, died on 29 November 2022.
- Main Beneficiary (Deceased): John William Veale, Shirley’s son, who was left the majority of the estate but died on 4 March 2023.
- Other Family Members Mentioned:
- Marilyn Corish: Shirley’s daughter, who initially joined the claim but later withdrew.
- Diane Veigel: Shirley’s deceased daughter.
- John’s five children: Beneficiaries of his intestate estate.
- Institutions Involved: Williamson Isabella Lawyers (for the Plaintiff), McAneny Lawyers (for the Defendant).
- Location: The main asset of the estate was a property at 25 Park Road, Bulli, New South Wales.
Simple summary of the case
The case revolved around a family provision claim, which is when someone feels they’ve been unfairly left out of a will. The person bringing the claim was David Chie, the 68-year-old son of the late Shirley Chie. Shirley’s will, made in 2008, left her house in Bulli, valued at nearly $2 million, plus a caravan, to her son John. Her other three children, including David, were to share whatever cash she had, which only amounted to about $44,000.
The story took a turn when John died just four months after Shirley, without leaving his own will. Under intestacy laws, this meant his estranged wife, Vicky, stood to inherit a significant portion of his estate, which now included Shirley’s house. David, facing health problems and with limited retirement savings, argued that the small amount of cash left to him was not adequate for his proper maintenance and advancement in life, especially given his lifelong good relationship with his mother. He asked the court for a lump sum of between $300,000 and $600,000.
The case presented a legal loophole or complication: the person defending the claim, Vicky, wasn’t a direct beneficiary of Shirley’s will. She was a beneficiary of a beneficiary. The court had to decide if her financial needs were relevant. The judge decided they were, because any money given to David would directly reduce what Vicky and John’s children would receive. Vicky argued David should get no more than $100,000, highlighting her own financial needs, including the desire to buy her own home.
The court looked into David’s financial and personal situation in detail. He had worked his whole life in physically demanding jobs despite a disability, had several health issues, and not enough superannuation to retire comfortably. Evidence also showed he was a good son who maintained a relationship with his mother despite her clear favouritism towards John. The judge found that David’s evidence about his financial situation was credible, even though there were some minor inconsistencies. A key point was Shirley’s clear intention, stated to her daughter Marilyn, that she did not want Vicky to get anything from her estate. The way events unfolded, with John dying intestate, meant this wish would be ignored if the will stood as it was.
Ultimately, the judge ruled that Shirley’s will had not made adequate provision for David. The judge believed a community would expect a mother in Shirley’s position to provide a “buffer” for a son in David’s circumstances. Considering David’s needs for a secure retirement and to cover future medical costs, the court ordered that he receive a lump sum of $450,000 from the sale of the Bulli property. You can find more detail on this case in the full judgement of Chie v Veale NSWSC 1143.
Q&A
- Is it legal for a parent to leave most of their estate to one child and very little to others?
Yes, it’s legal for a person to write their will however they wish. However, under the Succession Act, eligible persons like children can challenge the will if they believe it doesn’t make ‘adequate provision’ for their proper maintenance and advancement in life.
- Can I challenge a will just because I think it’s unfair?
Unfairness alone isn’t enough. The court needs to be satisfied that you haven’t been left with adequate provision for your maintenance, education or advancement. This involves looking at your financial needs, your relationship with the deceased, the size of the estate and the needs of other beneficiaries.
- Does being an adult child mean I have less of a claim?
The court’s expectations of what a parent should provide for an adult child are different from a young child. However, as this case shows, an adult child, particularly one with financial needs, health issues, or who is nearing retirement, can still have a strong claim.
- What happens if the main beneficiary of a will dies shortly after the person who made the will?
The inheritance becomes part of the beneficiary’s estate. If that beneficiary died without a will (intestate), as John did, their assets are distributed according to a set legal formula, which in this case prioritised his estranged wife and children.
- Can an estranged spouse inherit?
Yes. If a couple is separated but not divorced, they are still legally married. This means an estranged spouse can have significant rights to inherit under intestacy laws if their partner dies without a will.
- Is the financial situation of an indirect beneficiary relevant?
This case shows that it can be. The court decided to consider Vicky’s financial needs because any provision for David would directly impact what she would receive from John’s estate. The court can consider any matter it deems relevant.
- What kind of things does the court look at when assessing a claimant’s needs?
The court looks at everything: age, health, earning capacity, current financial resources, assets (like a home), liabilities (like loans), superannuation, and future needs, such as funds for retirement or potential medical expenses.
- Does my relationship with the deceased matter?
Absolutely. The court considers the nature and duration of the relationship. A good, close, and supportive relationship, as David demonstrated he had, can strengthen a claim. A poor relationship or estrangement can weaken it.
- What if the deceased verbally told someone their intentions for the will?
Evidence of the deceased’s intentions, like Shirley telling her daughter she didn’t want Vicky to get anything, can be considered by the court. While the written will is paramount, such statements can provide important context.
- Is it illegal to not fully disclose all my financial details in court?
While not necessarily illegal in a criminal sense, failing to provide a clear and honest picture of your finances can seriously damage your credibility and your case. It’s always best to be transparent.
- Can I get help from family to buy a property without it being considered my asset?
It can be complex. In this case, David held a property for his son Zachary. The court accepted it wasn’t David’s asset because there was clear evidence he was acting as a trustee for his son. Proper documentation is key to proving such arrangements.
- If I lend money to a family member making a claim, will that be counted against them?
Not necessarily. The court accepted that the $100,000 David received from his sister’s partner was a loan that he intended to repay. It was considered a liability, not an asset.
- Who pays the legal costs in a family provision case?
Often, the legal costs for all parties are paid out of the deceased’s estate, which reduces the amount available for beneficiaries. The judge makes the final decision on costs at the end of the case.
- What is the main takeaway from this case for people writing a will?
If you plan to leave a child out or provide them with a much smaller share than others, it’s wise to document your reasons clearly. A will-maker should consider the potential needs of all their children to reduce the chances of the will being successfully challenged later on.
- Where can I find more simplified summaries of court cases?
For more easy-to-understand summaries of legal cases, you can visit sites like Medigosa for NSW Supreme Court Cases.