Allan v Allan (2001) VSC 242 dealt with a claim for provision by an adult male son. The deceased left an estate valued at $250,000 which, other than small legacies to each of the applicant's two children, she left to the applicant's brother. In her will she declared that she had made no provision for the applicant because of gifts made to him during her lifetime and because of the legacies to his children.

The Supreme Court of Victoria awarded the sum of $75,000 to the applicant based on the following factors:

• the assistance the applicant son had given to his parents in helping them with their farming and cartage businesses;
• the promise made to the applicant by his parents that property would be left to him;
• the applicant son's modest financial circumstances;
• the fact that the applicant was an adult male did not mean that prima facie he was able to maintain and support himself. His gender was not relevant to the claim; and
• the deceased's expressed reason in her will as to why she had not made provision for the applicant was considered insufficient to override her responsibility to make adequate provision for him.

In the second case, Henderson v Rowden (2001) VSC 267 the deceased left one-eighth of her estate valued at $200,000, to the applicant step-son and the sum of $2,000 to each of his children. The balance was left to her god-child.

The Supreme Court of Victoria dismissed the applicant's claim (application for an extension in which to make a claim) based on the following factors:

• the applicant had become a step-son of the deceased when his father remarried. The applicant was then aged 18 years and there was no evidence to suggest that he ever lived with his father following his father's marriage to the deceased;
• there was no evidence that the step-son ever made any financial or other contribution to the wellbeing of his father and/or the deceased;
• the mere fact of a step-mother/step-son relationship, in the absence of any other factor, did not give rise to a responsibility to make provision; and
• the legacy left to the step-son and his children was more than adequate in the circumstances.

As most readers will be aware, claims for a share of the estate of a deceased are not restricted to those made by the deceased's spouse and children. It is now up to the court to determine on a case-by-case basis whether provision should be made for a particular applicant. Anybody can make an application and the court will assess it according to the criteria set out in the Administration and Probate Act 1958. These criteria are extensive and include the relationship between the deceased and the applicant, whether the applicant contributed to the deceased's assets, and the age but not gender of the applicant.