It takes little for family provision claims to cross borders, whether state or national. The property may be located in different places - other states or countries; the personal representatives, claimants or beneficiaries under the will may be from different places; or the deceased may have had a strong personal connection with another place. Any one of those cross-border considerations raises questions of a court's jurisdiction to deal with a family provision application, or of the law that will apply to it. In this article, we give an account of the principles of private international law - which in this area also apply in interstate matters - that affect family provision claims in Australia. In doing so, we explore recurrent complications with these cross-border family provision claims, including those arising under the cross-vesting scheme and in the federal jurisdiction. While we consider that the current equitable principles of choice of law remain best placed to address how provision should be made from different forms of property, reforms must be made to the equitable principles of jurisdiction if complications raised by the cross-vesting scheme and the possible exercise of federal jurisdiction in family provision claims are to be overcome.
机构:
Iowa State Univ, Dept Hist, Ames, IA 50011 USA
Iowa State Univ, US Latino Studies Program, Ames, IA 50011 USAIowa State Univ, Dept Hist, Ames, IA 50011 USA