---
title: "Family Protection & Estates | Wakatipu Chambers — Queenstown Barristers"
description: "Family Protection Act claims, will challenges and the defence of estates — run by counsel with a specialist estate-litigation background, for claimants and executors alike, with instructions taken from anywhere in New Zealand by video."
url: https://barristers.net.nz/services/family-protection-estates/
---
# Wills challenged. Estates defended.
> Family Protection Act claims, will challenges and the defence of estates — run by counsel with a specialist estate-litigation background, for claimants and executors alike, with instructions taken from anywhere in New Zealand by video.
We take estate litigation instructions from anywhere in New Zealand, run from Wakatipu Chambers in Queenstown — Family Protection Act 1955 claims by family members left without proper provision, will challenges on capacity and undue influence grounds, and the defence of estates and executors against claims.
## Family Protection Act work is core practice here.
Piers Blomfield practised as a Family Protection Act estate litigation lawyer before founding chambers, and holds postgraduate qualifications in family law and in wills and estates. He acts on both sides of these cases — for family members bringing claims, and for executors and estates defending them — which means every file is advised with a clear view of how the other side will run theirs.
### Family Protection Act claims

The Family Protection Act 1955 lets defined family members ask the court to intervene where a will has not made adequate provision for their proper maintenance and support. Eligibility is limited: spouses and civil union partners, de facto partners, children — including adult children — grandchildren in some circumstances, and stepchildren or parents who were financially dependent on the deceased.

The claim is not about equality between beneficiaries; it is about whether the deceased breached the moral duty owed to the claimant, judged by the standard of a wise and just testator. Financial need matters, but it is not the whole test — the courts also recognise a claimant's belonging to the family, which is why an adult child in comfortable circumstances can still succeed.

Timing is strict. Section 9 of the Act requires a claim to be brought within twelve months of the grant of administration — usually the grant of probate — and the court's discretion to allow more time is limited — in practice, missing the window is usually the end of the claim. Anyone weighing a claim should take advice well before the deadline, while the estate is still undistributed and the evidence is fresh.

- Eligible claimants: partners, children, grandchildren, dependent stepchildren and parents
- The test is moral duty — a wise and just testator standard
- Need counts, but family belonging is recognised too
- Twelve months from probate under s9 — act well before it

### Defending an estate

Chambers acts for executors and estates as often as for claimants. The defence starts the moment the first lawyer's letter arrives: an executor must respond honestly and promptly to requests for the will, the estate accounts and any s21 agreement — estates get criticised, and penalised, for withholding — but nothing requires an executor to concede the claim itself.

Most of these cases are decided on the papers, without witnesses being called, which makes the affidavits the heart of the defence. A strong reply affidavit answers every material assertion, attaches the evidence for each point, and stays measured — courts think less of parties who use an affidavit to relitigate old family grievances. Testamentary freedom still counts: a will reflecting reasoned, documented decisions — estrangement, or provision already made during life — can and does hold up.

The economics push toward mediation. These claims run across the Family Court and the High Court and can take years to try, so an early, honest assessment of the claim's strength — and a well-timed mediation — is usually where a good defence lands.

- Executors must disclose estate information promptly and honestly
- Decided on the papers — the reply affidavit carries the defence
- Reasoned, documented wills can withstand challenge
- Mediation is usually cheaper than years across two courts

### Will challenges & moral duty

The content of moral duty lives in the case law. *Little v Angus* [1981] set the orthodox approach: the court asks whether there has been a breach of moral duty judged by the standards of a wise and just testator, and disturbs the will only to the extent needed to remedy it. *Williams v Aucutt* [2000] then widened what "support" means — recognition of a claimant's place in the family, not only money for need.

The modern cases show how the factors weigh: the claimant's need, the relationship and any estrangement, the size of the estate, and the competing claims of other beneficiaries. In *Cartwright v Joseph* [2018], adult daughters in stable financial positions were still awarded shares of a $4 million estate where the estrangement was of the father's making — while other cases confirm that adequate, well-reasoned provision defeats a claim.

A will can also be attacked on validity grounds that sit apart from the FPA — lack of testamentary capacity, undue influence, fraud or forgery, or failure to meet the formalities of the Wills Act 2007. Which route fits depends on what actually happened around the making of the will, and more than one can run at once.

- *Little v Angus* — the wise and just testator standard
- *Aucutt* — support includes recognition of family belonging
- Need, relationship, estate size and competing claims all weigh
- Validity challenges: capacity, undue influence, fraud, formalities

- [Leading PRA and estate cases](https://barristers.net.nz/services/family-law/leading-pra-cases)
Part of: [Family Law](https://barristers.net.nz/services/family-law)

## Frequently asked questions
**Who can challenge a will in New Zealand?**

Only defined categories of people. Under the Family Protection Act 1955 the claimants are spouses and civil union partners, de facto partners, children (including adult children), grandchildren in some circumstances, and stepchildren or parents who were financially dependent on the deceased. Separate validity challenges — capacity, undue influence, fraud or forgery, or defects under the Wills Act 2007 — can be brought by people with an interest in the estate. Which route applies depends on your relationship to the deceased and what happened when the will was made.

**How long do I have to bring a Family Protection Act claim?**

Twelve months from the grant of administration — usually the grant of probate — under section 9 of the Act. The court has a limited discretion to extend, but late claims face real difficulty — particularly once the estate has been distributed. The practical answer is to take advice as soon as you suspect you may have grounds: evidence is fresher, the estate is intact, and settlement options are still open.

**What is the moral duty the courts look at?**

It is the obligation a will-maker owes to provide proper maintenance and support for close family, judged by the standard of a wise and just testator. The courts weigh the claimant's financial position, the relationship and any estrangement, the size of the estate and the claims of other beneficiaries — and since Williams v Aucutt, "support" includes recognising a claimant's place in the family, not only financial need. It is a fact-specific assessment, not a formula.

**Will an estate dispute go to trial?**

Very rarely. In our experience the great majority of Family Protection Act claims settle at mediation or are withdrawn — very few run all the way to a trial decision. That shapes the strategy on both sides: an honest early view of the claim's strength, and preparation aimed at mediation, is usually what decides the outcome.