Family Provision Act 1970

The Act rests on several interlocking legal constructs. First, eligibility. Section 7 lists the classes of persons who may apply: spouse or de facto partner, former spouse or former de facto partner (subject to maintenance immediately before death, s 7(2)(a)), child, stepchild (again subject to maintenance immediately before death, s 7(2)(b)), grandchild (with conditions, s 7(3)), and parent (with conditions, s 7(4)). The definition of who was “maintained” is strictly framed, and includes an extant court maintenance order, a non‑nominal contribution to maintenance by agreement or fact, or a situation where a court would have power to compel maintenance if the deceased were alive (s 7(7)).

Second, substantive remedial power. Section 8 gives the Court a broad discretion to order provision from the deceased’s estate where “adequate provision is not available” from the will, intestacy law, or both. The relief is expressly for proper maintenance, education and advancement in life, and the Court must consider “all the circumstances” in deciding what provision is fit (s 8(1)). The Court may refuse relief where the applicant’s character or conduct disentitles them (s 8(3)). The Court may also treat one person’s application as representing all potential applicants (s 8(4)).

Third, procedural mechanics. Time limits are governed by s 9, which fixes a 12 month filing window after grant of administration, but allows extensions on hearing and subject to conditions (s 9(2)-(3)), while preventing extension after the estate has been lawfully and fully distributed (s 9(4)). Service obligations are imposed on the applicant to serve notice on each administrator (s 10(1)), and the Court may direct service on any other persons it thinks fit (s 10(2)).

Fourth, allocation and security. The Court specifies the amount and nature of provision (s 11(1)). Unless the Court otherwise orders, the burden of the provision is borne among those beneficially entitled to the estate in proportion to their respective interests (s 11(2)). The Court can set aside a class fund and prescribe its administration, with the administrator normally acting as trustee unless ordered otherwise (s 12).

Fifth, special property and reversibility. The Act permits provision to be charged on property subject to a general or special power of appointment in certain circumstances (s 13). Where administration was granted on a presumption of death, the Court may require undertakings or security to guard against revocation of administration (s 14). The Court also has power to discharge, vary or suspend orders on application, including where the recipient has since become otherwise enabled (s 17).

Sixth, interaction points. The Act links explicitly to other instruments: it repeals predecessor ordinances (s 3); it treats sealed out‑of‑Territory probates as local grants for the purposes of the Act (s 4(2)); it operates with the Administration and Probate Act 1969 regarding definitions of intestacy and modification of intestacy rules (s 4, s 16(2)); and it uses the Wills Act 2000 construction of general devises/bequests (s 13(2)-(3)).

These concepts combine to produce a statutory regime that reallocates estate assets subject to eligibility filters, strict procedural windows, judicial discretion, and integration with existing probate and wills law.

The Act affects three broad groups of actors, and a number of secondary actors who administer estates or advise parties.

1. Potential applicants and their families. The immediate effect falls on the classes named in s 7: current spouses and de facto partners, former spouses and de facto partners (if maintained immediately prior to death, s 7(2)(a)), children, stepchildren (if maintained, s 7(2)(b)), grandchildren (subject to the conditions in s 7(3)), and parents (subject to s 7(4)). Each class has statutory conditions that gate access, for example the maintenance requirement for former partners, stepchildren and parents in certain circumstances (s 7(2), s 7(3), s 7(4), s 7(7)). Grandchildren can only apply if their parent predeceased the testator, or if the grandchild was not maintained by their parent immediately before the deceased’s death (s 7(3)). A child born alive after death is treated as born before death for entitlement purposes (s 7(8)).

2. Executors, administrators and beneficiaries. Executors and administrators are directly affected by the duty to respond to applications and by exposure to orders that alter distributions. Applicants must serve notice on each administrator (s 10(1)). Beneficiaries who stand to contribute to ordered provision may have their shares charged proportionally under s 11(2). Administrators who distribute the estate in line with proper notice provisions under the Administration and Probate Act 1969 are insulated from actions in many circumstances (s 21), but they can be subject to court orders if distributions occurred before notice of an application and the Court orders provision out of distributed property, subject to the protection in s 20(2).

3. Trustees and financial managers. Where the Court sets up a class fund, it will attract a trustee, ordinarily the estate administrator unless the Court provides otherwise (s 12(4)). Trustees have powers and duties set by the Court as to investment and application of capital and income (s 12(2)). The Act also limits commercial dealings in ordered provision: any mortgage, charge or assignment of an order’s benefit is of no effect without the Court’s permission (s 19).

4. Courts and litigators. The Supreme Court is the decision maker under the Act, exercising broad discretion over adequacy, amount and source of provision (s 8). The Court decides whether to extend time limits (s 9(2)), whether an applicant has been maintained (s 7(7)), whether to order charging of property subject to a power of appointment (s 13), and whether to require undertakings in presumptive death situations (s 14). Legal practitioners advising executors and potential applicants must navigate these thresholds and procedural steps.

5. Parties dealing with property subject to powers of appointment, and those relying on sealed probates or external grants. Section 13 engages property over which the deceased had a power of appointment, and s 4(2) treats sealed external probates as grants in the Territory. Persons who take under such arrangements may face charges or be required to contribute to provision under certain criteria.

In sum, the Act shifts rights and potential liabilities not only onto potential claimants, but onto administrators, beneficiaries, trustees, and advisers who must respond to applications and possible court-ordered reallocation of estate resources.

The Act establishes specific duties, procedural obligations and substantive rights. Key duties include service and notice obligations. An applicant must serve notice of the application on each administrator of the estate (s 10(1)). The Court may order additional persons to be given notice (s 10(2)(b)). Administrators have the duty to respond and to hold or distribute estate assets subject to statutory safeguards, and where the Court orders a class fund, the administrator is, unless the Court orders otherwise, the trustee charged with investing and applying the fund (s 12(4)).

Applicants’ rights are statutory and conditional. Eligible persons have the right to apply to the Court for provision out of the estate (s 7(1)), but the right is qualified by the maintenance and dependency conditions in s 7(2) to (4) and by the Court’s discretion to refuse where the applicant’s character or conduct disentitles them (s 8(3)). Applicants have the procedural right to seek extension of the 12 month filing period (s 9(2)-(3)), subject to hearing affected persons and the Court’s conditions.

The Court’s rights and obligations are defined. The Court may order provision it thinks fit for proper maintenance, education and advancement in life, having regard to all the circumstances (s 8(1)). It must consider benefits conferred by exercise of powers of appointment as part of the estate available to the applicant (s 8(2)). The Court may regard one application as representative of all eligible persons (s 8(4)). It may make orders charging property over which the deceased exercised powers of appointment if adequate provision cannot otherwise be made or special circumstances exist (s 13(1)). When making orders, the Court specifies amounts, conditions and may allocate the burden of payment among beneficiaries in proportion to their beneficial interests unless otherwise ordered (s 11(1)-(2)).

Security and enforcement duties arise where administration was granted on a presumption of death. The Court may require the applicant to give undertakings or security to restore property or its value if administration is later revoked because the person was found to be alive (s 14). This duty attaches to recipients of property other than money, and to recipients of money, with precise obligations to restore property or pay equivalent sums to the living person or that person’s administrator (s 14(a)-(b)).

Administrators have a statutory protection duty when distributing assets. An action does not lie against an administrator for distributions that were proper under s 20(2), or where distributions were made before notice of an application and the administrator had complied with notice requirements under s 96 of the Administration and Probate Act 1969 and the claims period had expired (s 21(a)-(b)). This provides administrators with a duty to observe notice rules to obtain protection.

Finally, parties have rights to seek variation or discharge of orders. The Court may discharge, vary or suspend an order upon application by the administrator or persons beneficially entitled or interested, and may do so on evidence that the recipient has acquired independent means (s 17(1)-(2)). However, the Court cannot increase a provision made by an earlier order (s 17(3)). Notice of applications to vary or discharge must be served on beneficiaries under the order (s 17(4)).

Together these duties and rights structure who must act, how notice and process must be handled, when security is required, how burdens are allocated among beneficiaries, and how orders may be adjusted as circumstances change.

The Act does not create criminal penalties. Enforcement is civil and judicial, resting on the Court’s powers to make, vary, suspend or discharge orders, and on the proprietary and equitable effects of those orders.

Primary enforcement mechanisms are judicial orders. The Court may order payment of lump sums, periodical payments, create a class fund, or charge property with provision (s 11(1); s 12; s 13). These orders are enforceable as Court orders. Section 16(1) makes such an order operate as if it were a codicil executed by the deceased immediately before death, which gives the order legal effect vis a vis the estate’s administration and beneficiaries. Where the deceased died intestate, an order operates as a modification of Division 4 of Part III of the Administration and Probate Act 1969 (s 16(2)), altering the statutory intestacy allocations.

The Act contains specific restrictions limiting private enforcement arrangements. Any mortgage, charge or assignment of an interest in provision made by an order is ineffective unless made with the Court’s permission (s 19). This prevents beneficiaries from unilaterally disposing of or encumbering their statutory entitlement absent judicial oversight, and indirectly enforces the Court’s control over funding and security arrangements.

Where administration was granted on a presumption of death, the Court can require an undertaking or security to ensure that property or money supplied under an order is restored if administration is revoked because the presumed dead person is alive (s 14). This is a prospective enforcement mechanism protecting the reconstituted estate or the living person’s interests.

The Act empowers the Court to make orders charging property that has already been distributed, subject to limits protecting proper distributions to dependants (s 20). If the Court orders provision out of property already distributed, the administrators or beneficiaries who received property may be required to make payments or return property, subject to the protective exception in s 20(2). Administrators who complied with notice requirements under s 96 of the Administration and Probate Act 1969, and where claims times had expired, are shielded from action for distributions made before notice (s 21). This reduces the prospect of collateral litigation against administrators who followed statutory notice rules.

Variation and discharge are enforceable by further court orders. The Court may discharge or modify its earlier orders where circumstances change, including where a recipient acquires alternative means (s 17(1)-(2)). The Court cannot, however, increase a provision previously made (s 17(3)).

There are no express statutory fines or criminal sanctions in the Act for non‑compliance by parties. Non‑compliant or contesting beneficiaries or administrators are subject to civil process and orders of the Supreme Court, with the usual civil enforcement apparatus (contempt, garnishee, execution) impliedly available in enforcement of Court orders. The Act’s protective provisions for administrators identify the procedural thresholds (notice under s 96 Administration and Probate Act 1969) that, if satisfied, limit liability (s 21).

The Act embeds and references other Northern Territory statutes and common statutory provisions, creating several interaction points.

1. Administration and Probate Act 1969. The Act imports the definition of “intestate” from s 61(1) of the Administration and Probate Act 1969 in s 4(1). Section 4(2) expressly provides that probates or administrations granted outside the Territory, once sealed with the Court under s 111 of the Administration and Probate Act 1969, are to be treated as grants in the Territory on the sealing date. Section 16(2) explicitly states that an order under this Act in relation to intestate property operates as a modification of Division 4 of Part III of the Administration and Probate Act 1969 in its application to that property. Section 21 cross‑references the notice regime in s 96 of the Administration and Probate Act 1969 as a condition for an administrator to obtain protection from suits arising from distributions made before notice of an application.

2. Wills Act 2000. Section 13(2) and (3) reference s 35 of the Wills Act 2000, adopting that Act’s rules for construing general devises and bequests as potentially including property over which the testator had a power of appointment. This affects the “other property” the Court may deem available for provision under s 13(1)(c)(i), making certain real and personal property susceptible to orders charging property subject to the deceased’s unexercised power.

3. Sealing and recognition of external grants. The recognition mechanism in s 4(2) means that foreign or interstate probates or administrations, once sealed, are treated as local grants for the purposes of eligibility and time limits under the Act, with the sealing date as the operative date.

4. Repeal and transitional continuity. The Act repeals the Testator’s Family Maintenance Ordinance 1929 and 1931 (s 3). Transitional provisions in s 6 preserve orders made and proceedings instituted under the repealed ordinances, deeming pending proceedings to be instituted under this Act (s 6(1)-(2)), while appeals that had not been finally disposed of continue to be governed by the old Ordinance (s 6(3)).

5. Interaction with estate distribution and third parties. Section 20 permits the Court to make orders out of property already distributed by the administrator, but s 20(2) protects distributions that were proper for the maintenance, education or advancement in life of dependants. Section 21 extends protection to administrators who complied with the notice provisions of the Administration and Probate Act 1969 and who distributed after the relevant claims period expired, limiting collateral exposure and providing administrators with a procedural safe harbour.

6. Statutory amendment history. The endnotes list numerous amending Acts (for example, the Wills Act 2000 amendments, the Law Reform (Gender, Sexuality and De Facto Relationships) Act 2003), and general amendments from Ordinances Revision and Interpretation Legislation Amendment Act 2018, indicating that the Act has been read in light of subsequent statutory reforms in related areas. Those amendments affect definitions and scope of eligibility, for example de facto relationships being included through amendments noted in the endnotes.

Practitioners must therefore read the Family Provision Act alongside the Administration and Probate Act 1969 and the Wills Act 2000 to determine critical dates, the status of sourced probates, how intestacy rules are modified, the scope of property subject to charge, and the protection available to administrators. The Act assumes and operates within the broader probate framework, rather than replacing it.

The reprinted text includes an endnotes section that documents the principal amendments and legislative instruments affecting the Act. The Act originally commenced as the Family Provision Ordinance 1970, assented to 8 April 1970 and commencing 17 March 1971 according to the endnotes. It repealed earlier Testator’s Family Maintenance Ordinances of 1929 and 1931 (s 3).

Significant amending legislation recorded in the endnotes includes:

• Status of Children Act 1978 (Act No. 16, 1979), assented 26 January 1979, commenced 21 September 1979. This suggests amendments to the definitions and perhaps the status of children for entitlement purposes, reflected in endnote references to s 7 being amended by that Act.

• Family Provision Act 1979 (Act No. 36, 1979), assented 27 April 1979, commenced 3 December 1979. The endnotes show s 4 and s 7 amendments were effected by this Act.

• Family Provision Amendment Act 1980 (Act No. 10, 1981), assented 9 January 1981, commenced 20 February 1981. This amending Act effected multiple amendments across the Act, as the list of amendments cites s 1-2, s 4, s 5-6, s 8, s 11-12, s 13, s 16-17, and s 20-22 as amended by No. 10, 1981. The 1981 amending legislation appears to have been a comprehensive update.

• De Facto Relationships (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 1991 (Act No. 82, 1991), assented 24 December 1991, commenced 1 January 1992. The effect was to amend s 4 and s 7, consistent with the extension of recognition to de facto relationships.

• Family Provision Amendment Act 2000 (Act No. 60, 2000), assented 14 November 2000, commenced 1 March 2001. This Act amended s 13, possibly to align with changes in the Wills Act 2000 referenced elsewhere in the reprint.

• Law Reform (Gender, Sexuality and De Facto Relationships) Act 2003 (Act No. 1, 2004), assented 7 January 2004, commenced 17 March 2004. The reprint explicitly notes s 4 and s 7 were amended by this Act (s 62 of that Act). This suggests reforms to definitions and eligibility regarding de facto relationships and gender/sexuality related provisions.

• Interpretation Legislation Amendment Act 2018 (Act No. 22, 2018) made general amendments of a formal nature to ss 1, 4, 5, 6, 13, 16 and 21, according to the endnotes. The reprint’s endnotes indicate formal or technical updates to wording and cross references.

The endnotes include multiple Ordinances Revision Acts and Statute Law Revision Acts across the 1970s and early 1980s which made general or formal amendments. The list of amendments at the endnotes confirms a pattern of iterative amendment across most substantive provisions, particularly in the early 1980s and around 2000 and 2003 to reflect changes in wills law and relationship law.

Transitional and savings provisions are recorded in s 6 of the Act, and the endnotes reference specific savings for the 2003 Law Reform Act at s 69 of that Act. The endnotes’ list of amending Acts provides dates of assent and commencement where available, and indicates the Act has been periodically updated to align with broader statutory reforms concerning status of children, de facto relationships, and the Wills Act.

Practitioners should treat the endnotes as a road map to past amendments and consult consolidated legislation and current versions of cross referenced statutes for the operative wording and procedural obligations at the time of a particular estate matter.

The reprinted Act text contains no case law or decided litigation history. The Act’s endnotes and provisions do not list judicial authorities that have interpreted its sections, and no decisions are referenced within the statute itself. Therefore, the text does not supply a litigation history or examples of how courts have applied specific provisions.

However, the Act contains multiple provisions that are likely to generate contested litigation in practice, and those are potential litigation themes: eligibility disputes under s 7, including whether a former spouse, stepchild or parent was “maintained” immediately before death under s 7(7); adequacy disputes under s 8 concerning whether provision available from the will or under intestacy law was adequate for maintenance, education and advancement in life; disputes about extension of the 12 month time limit under s 9; challenges about sufficiency of service on administrators under s 10; contests about the Court’s power to order provision out of property subject to a power of appointment under s 13, and about the application of s 35 of the Wills Act 2000 as invoked by s 13(2)-(3); disputes over the exercise of the Court’s discretion to refuse relief on grounds of character or conduct under s 8(3); litigation over the allocation of burden among beneficiaries pursuant to s 11(2); arguments over the Court’s authority to charge property already distributed under s 20 and the limits of the protective exception in s 20(2); and applications to vary or discharge orders under s 17.

Given the Act’s integration with the Administration and Probate Act 1969 and the Wills Act 2000 (see s 4, s 13 and s 16), disputes could also centre on how sealed grants from other jurisdictions are treated (s 4(2)), and on the ambit of the modification of intestacy rules (s 16(2)). Section 22’s provision for reception of a testator’s signed statement of reasons provides another evidentiary locus for litigation as to weight to be attached to such a statement, the reliability of a dated signed statement, and the inferences that may be drawn from surrounding circumstances under s 22(3).

Because the reprint does not include reported authorities, practitioners must search the Northern Territory law reports and the Supreme Court’s published decisions to find judicial interpretation of key thresholds such as “adequate provision”, the scope of “advancement in life”, the application of s 7(7)’s “maintained” test, the criteria for an extension of time under s 9, and the limits on charging property under s 13. The Act’s language and the Court’s broad discretion make these judicial interpretations highly relevant to advising clients and predicting outcomes in particular factual matrices.

In short, the statutory text itself contains no litigation history, but it creates multiple contestable points that in practice are resolved through case law located outside the statute. Those authorities are not provided in the reprint and must be identified by case law research.

The Act contains several procedural and substantive traps for unprepared practitioners and estate administrators. These “gotchas” are concrete risks flowing from specific provisions.

1. Strict 12 month time bar, with narrow exceptions. An application must be made within 12 months after administration has been granted, unless the Court extends time (s 9(1)-(2)). Extensions require the Court to hear affected persons and may be made on conditions, but an extension cannot be sought after the estate has been lawfully and fully distributed (s 9(3)-(4)). Practitioners should not assume automatic leniency; once full lawful distribution occurs the Court lacks power to grant an extension (s 9(4)).

2. Eligibility hinges on “maintenance”. Several classes of potential applicants must show they were maintained by the deceased immediately before death to have standing: former spouses/partners and stepchildren (s 7(2)), and in some cases parents or grandchildren (s 7(3)-(4)). The statutory test for maintenance is specific and excludes nominal contributions; it includes extant court orders, non‑nominal contributions by agreement or fact, or situations where a court would have had power to make a maintenance order if the deceased were alive (s 7(7)). Failing to assemble evidence meeting that statutory test can be fatal to an application.

3. Grandchildren and posthumous children. A grandchild’s right is conditional: either the child’s parent must have predeceased the testator, or the grandchild must not have been maintained by the parent immediately before the deceased’s death (s 7(3)). A child born alive after the death of the deceased is treated as if born before the death for entitlement purposes (s 7(8)). Practitioners must check these temporal rules carefully.

4. Effect of powers of appointment. Property over which the deceased exercised a general or special power of appointment may be charged if the Court is satisfied adequate provision cannot be made from other estate property, or special circumstances exist (s 13(1)(c)). The Wills Act 2000 construction rules are pulled in by reference (s 13(2)-(3)). This can extend the scope of assets exposed to claims beyond a straightforward look at the residue.

5. Sealed probates treated as local grants. Probates or administrations granted outside the Territory, once sealed under s 111 of the Administration and Probate Act 1969, are deemed to be grants in the Territory on the sealing date (s 4(2)). Time limits and rights under the Act will therefore depend on that date, which may be later than the original grant.

6. Court may require undertakings or security where administration was based on presumed death. If administration was granted on the presumption that a person was dead, and the Court makes an order for provision from that estate, it may require undertakings or security that the recipient will restore property or pay money in the event administration is revoked because the person was alive (s 14). That can affect liquidity and risk for applicants who are awarded property.

7. Burden allocation among beneficiaries. Unless the Court orders otherwise, those beneficially entitled to the estate bear the burden of the ordered provision in proportion to their interests (s 11(2)). This can create conflict among beneficiaries and complicate settlement negotiations.

8. Restrictions on dealing with ordered provision. Any mortgage, charge or assignment over a provision made by order is void unless the Court permits it (s 19). Beneficiaries cannot freely use their entitlement as security for borrowing without further court approval.

9. Risk where estate distributed before notice. The Court has power to order provision out of property already distributed (s 20(1)), subject to a protective exception for distributions that were proper for the maintenance, education or advancement of a dependent (s 20(2)). Administrators who distribute without observing notice procedures under the Administration and Probate Act 1969 risk having distributed assets brought back into account, unless they complied with the notices and claims period giving them protection (s 21).

10. Evidence of testator’s reasons admitted but weight discretionary. The Court may admit a signed statement by the testator setting out reasons for dispositions or failure to make them (s 22(2)), but must assess the weight of that statement having regard to surrounding circumstances (s 22(3)). Practitioners must be careful in relying on such statements because the Court may discount them.

11. Court’s discretion to refuse on character or conduct grounds. The Court may refuse to make an order where the applicant’s character or conduct disentitles them to benefit (s 8(3)). This creates an evidentiary and tactical risk for applicants with difficult histories.

12. Administrator’s protection depends on precise compliance. Section 21’s protection hinges on the distribution being either a proper distribution under s 20(2) or made after the administrator had given notices under s 96 of the Administration and Probate Act 1969 and the claims period had expired (s 21(a)-(b)). Failure to observe those technical notice and claims procedures removes the statutory shield.

Awareness of these statutory traps is essential. In practice, early identification of eligible applicants, timely filing, meticulous evidence of maintenance or dependency, careful service on administrators, and attention to sealed grant dates and powers of appointment will be determinative.

Compliance with the Act is primarily procedural and evidentiary, coupled with strategic engagement with the Court’s discretionary powers. The following steps operationalise statutory obligations and minimise exposure to the “gotchas” above. Each step links to the governing provisions.

1. Determine eligibility promptly. Identify whether a potential applicant falls within s 7(1) classes. For former spouses, former de facto partners, stepchildren, grandparents and parents, assemble evidence addressing the specific statutory thresholds in s 7(2)-(4) and s 7(7). For example, to satisfy the maintenance requirement, produce court orders, written agreements or demonstrable non‑nominal contributions. Treat children born after death as potentially eligible under s 7(8).

2. Calculate critical dates. Determine the date administration was granted. The 12 month filing window begins from that grant (s 9(1)). If the grant is a sealed external probate under s 4(2), use the sealing date as the operative date. File the application early, because extensions are discretionary and cannot be sought after lawful full distribution of the estate (s 9(4)).

3. Prepare and file the application. An application under s 8 should be instituted by notice of motion or other originating document, and is deemed filed on the date that document is filed (s 9(5)). Ensure the relief sought is framed in terms of proper maintenance, education and advancement in life, and include evidence of the applicant’s needs, the estate’s assets, and the adequacy or inadequacy of testamentary or intestacy provision (s 8(1)-(2)).

4. Serve administrators and others. Serve notice of the application on each administrator of the estate (s 10(1)). Apply to the Court to order further service where appropriate, because the Court may require notice be served on other persons it thinks fit (s 10(2)). Keep records of service to preserve administrator protections in s 21.

5. Assemble and present evidentiary material. Collect financial statements, evidence of dependency and maintenance, records of the deceased’s assets and dispositions, and, where relevant, any signed statement by the testator purporting to set out reasons for dispositions (s 22(2)). If a testator’s statement exists, be prepared to address its weight under s 22(3).

6. Address powers of appointment and property exposure. Identify whether any property may be subject to a general or special power of appointment. If so, prepare argument on whether adequate provision can be made from other estate property or whether special circumstances justify charging that property under s 13(1)(c). If general devises or bequests have been used, assess whether s 35 of the Wills Act 2000 applies per s 13(2)-(3).

7. Consider security where administration followed presumed death. If administration was granted on a presumption of death, expect the Court to consider undertakings or security under s 14. Prepare proposals for suitable security or undertakings, and consider liquidity if property other than money is proposed to be transferred.

8. Plan for burden allocation. Anticipate that, absent a contrary order, the burden of ordered provision will be apportioned among beneficiaries in proportion to their interests (s 11(2)). Advise beneficiaries of potential proportional contributions and explore settlements or proposals to allocate liability differently before the Court, to avoid pro rata surprises.

9. Avoid unauthorised deals on ordered benefits. Do not mortgage, charge or assign an interest in a provision made by order unless the Court’s permission is obtained (s 19). If a beneficiary needs to use future entitlements as security, seek the Court’s permission proactively.

10. If estate has been distributed, assess protections and remedies. If distribution occurred before notice of an application, evaluate whether distributions were proper for dependants under s 20(2), as this will bar the Court from disturbing such distributions. If notices under s 96 of the Administration and Probate Act 1969 were given and the claims period expired before distribution, administrators have protection under s 21. If not, advise administrators of the risk of being required to account under s 20(1).

11. Manage orders and trustee duties. Where the Court orders a class fund, prepare to act as trustee if you are the administrator, unless the Court orders otherwise (s 12(4)). The trustee must invest and apply the capital and income as the Court directs or as the trustee thinks fit subject to Court directions, and must keep records accordingly (s 12(2)-(3)).

12. Seek variations where circumstances change. If you are an administrator or a beneficiary and circumstances materially change (for example the recipient acquires independent means), apply under s 17 to vary, suspend or discharge the order. Give notice to persons who take a benefit under the order (s 17(4)).

13. Endorse certified copies on probate. When an order is made, obtain the Court’s direction that a certified copy be endorsed on or annexed to the probate or letters of administration (s 18). Produce the probate or letters of administration when required.

14. Engage early with counsel experienced in family provision law. The Act grants broad judicial discretion, and outcomes turn on facts and advocacy. Given the multiple interplay points with other statutes and the need to handle evidentiary, timing and property‑specific issues, early specialist advice will help craft applications, negotiate settlements and protect administrators’ positions.

Adhering to those steps, and mapping each task to the relevant statutory provision cited above, will reduce procedural risk and position parties to present their case effectively to the Court.