Younger Sister Sued by Older Sister over Mother’s Will

A north shore doyenne’s daughter, who was left out of her mother’s will because of favouritism, has successfully sued her younger sister in order to land herself a portion of her mother’s $2 million estate.

North Shore Daughter Contests Mother’s Will

This week, in a NSW court, a judge ruled that the daughter, who was 73 years old, required help in order to ensure she could make ends meet. Therefore, it was ruled that she should receive $425,000 for ongoing expenses - $2615 of which was allocated for her water aerobics and pilates classes.

Clarice Winifred Woods was a member of the Moree mayoral family, and after moving to Sydney in the 1940s, she lived to the grand age of 99, dying in 2015. Her daughter Winifred Jodell, to whom she was estranged from, was left with nothing from her Will. Meanwhile, her other daughter, Helen Woods, aged 66, was left the entire estate, which included a home which was worth $1.8 million, on Bannockburn Road in Turramurra.

While speaking to the court, Ms. Jodell told them that she had never had a close relationship with her mother. She described a childhood which was ‘rebellious’, and says that consequently, she wasn’t treated lovingly. She described the extent of the breakdown of the relationship, saying that her mother didn’t attend important events in her life, including her graduation, and first wedding, as well as disapproving of her first divorce. After Mrs Wood’s husband, Jack, died in 1996, the divide between the two only got deeper.

Ms Jodell felt that her mother had purposely kept her out of the loop, not informing her of her father’s ill health for a long time, and in fact only told her of his ill health just before he passed away. Mrs Woods claimed, in turn, that her daughter had acted unsympathetically. 

In his Will, Mr Woods left his estate, a modest $86,168, to Ms Jodell. In turn, she refused to give his car to her mother, unless she was given belongings of her father’s.

In a letter to the family she explained her feelings about the way she had been treated, and her feelings about the Will:

‘I suppose my father’s Will is in a way confirmation for me that love and support have not been expressed in an even-handed way in my parents’ family.’, adding ‘While it does appear I am being favoured, perhaps it was a corrective step.’

It emerged that 3 days after her father passed, Ms Jodell had visited her mother to ask about her father’s Will, and her mother told her she was to leave, and asked her never to return.

In a letter from mother to daughter, written in 2003, Mrs Woods claimed that her daughter had ‘no sympathy for me at this time’, writing ‘it seemed that after 56 years of marriage of some of those years were very hard, I had no rights.’

This was the final nail in the coffin for the relationship between mother and daughter, and the pair didn’t see each other again until just before Mrs Woods’ passing.

Ms Jodell, however, provided crucial evidence that she had tried to make amends with her mother in the intervening years, producing 3 letters she had sent to her mother, which shared news, enquired about her wellbeing, and an attempt to arrange to meet up.

Helen was told by her mother that she couldn’t get past Ms Jodell’s conduct after the death of her father, and ultimately did not respond to any of her letters. She said ‘forgiveness is not the issue nor do I wish to punish her. I just wish to be left alone.’

After the death of her mother, Ms Jodell applied to the court for family provision orders.

Court Action

In cases such as this, a court can determine whether a person who is eligible has been left in a situation where they have inadequate provisions for ‘proper maintenance, education or advancement in life’, and, if the court finds this is the case, then an assessment is made as to how much can be taken from the estate to satisfy these purposes.

Ms Jodell made the argument that her age pension was not sufficient enough to cover her needs. She stated that there was a $300,000 shortfall from the sale of her home in Castlemaine, Victoria, which was sold in order to move to a retirement village in Melbourne. She also included in her needs $43,590 for a new car, and roughly $8289 a year for activities including water aerobics, pilates, and garden maintenance.

Ms Woods argued that because her sister was estranged, that she wasn’t entitled to any money from the estate. She said that her sister’s shortfall only worked out at $6 a week, something which she could avoid if she spent less time taking trips abroad.

Justice Philip Hallen ruled that Ms Jodell’s estrangement did not totally negate her need for financial support. He said: ‘I am of the view that the deceased’s disappointment, as a wise and just testatrix, should not have blinded her to the needs of one of her two children, for maintenance or advancement in life.’

The letter sent to Mrs Wood showed that Ms Jodell was reluctant to let the relationship end, and because of this, Mrs Wood’s obligations as a mother were not relieved.

The judge added that Ms Jodell might have acted in a callous manner after the passing of her father, but put equal blame on Mrs Wood, saying ‘each was entitled to expect the support of the other at that time.’, adding ‘each appears to have felt that the other did not provide that support. The difference between them was that, subsequently, Ms Jodell did not wish to end, completely, their relationship.’

Bond between sisters now further strained after their mother’s death.

Contact our Expert Contesting a Will Solicitors Sydney, NSW

If you are looking for lawyers experienced in contesting wills in Sydney, or looking for a law firm who can assist the estate in defending a claim for further provision, contact George Szabo on 02 9281 5088, or fill in our online contact form.