DNA test sought by potential claimant

Published in the Coffs Coast News Of The Area on 30 August 2024.

Sam passed away 20 years ago. His wife, Ruth, is now 90 years of age.

Paul was recently told by his mother that despite what he had been led to believe during his lifetime, Sam was in fact his biological father.

Having not received any inheritance from Sam’s estate, Paul files a Summons in the Supreme Court of NSW, seeking a lump sum from the estate, by way of a “family provision order”.

These types of claims are subject to a limitation period of 12 months from the date of death, but the limitation period can be extended “on sufficient cause being shown”.

Paul files an application in the case, to the effect that Sam’s children are subject to a DNA test in order to establish whether Paul is in fact Sam’s son, conceding that if he is not Sam’s son, he has no standing to bring a family provision claim against his estate.

Due to her age, Ruth is represented by one of her sons as her “tutor”. He opposes the application, denying that Paul is Sam’s son. He claims that Paul’s mother was suffering from dementia when she made the allegation regarding Paul’s parentage and further, that there were other individuals who could be Paul’s biological father.

In reviewing the evidence, the Court notes that none of Sam’s children indicated that they personally object to DNA testing for religious or medical reasons, nor that they would not abide by an order of the Court to participate in any such test.

The Court hears additional evidence that DNA testing had confirmed that Paul was not biologically related to his “assumed” father.

Ultimately, the Court rules that there is “real utility” in ordering the testing because a negative result would bring an early end to the proceedings, “saving everyone time, trouble and costs”. The Court proceeds to make orders that the parties participate in the DNA tests.

This fictional column is only accurate at today’s date and is not legal advice.