In a case before the Court of Appeal in October 2023, a woman named Irene passed away, sparking a series of family disputes. Irene's estate was valued at $36 million, mostly held within a family company of which she was the managing director. Irene had 4 children. Under Irene's will, one of the children, Nick, was gifted the management shares of the company, which gave him full control. The other shares were split evenly amongst the other 3 children. They held no control. Nicks' 3 siblings claimed that they were told by Irene that they would receive substantial wealth from the company. The Court agreed with the siblings and claimed that they had been left without enough from the estate for their "maintenance, education or advancement in life" because of their expectations based on what Irene had told them. The court ordered that the management shares be divided evenly between the siblings, giving them equal voting rights over the company. Nick appealed this decision, claiming that what The Court awarded the siblings was unreasonable and beyond what the siblings needed financially. Nick further claimed that his siblings' lack of financial need should have been considered. He also argued that the siblings' expectations of benefitting from the family company were irrelevant. The Court has the power to consider any relevant matters when deciding whether to amend a will and change the distribution given to the beneficiaries. The Court of appeal ruled that expectations of the children to receive wealth from the company was relevant in this case. The case highlights the complexity and range of factors that can be considered during estate disputes, which requires proper legal advice. This case is important as there is a focus on expectations even in circumstances where the parties requesting further provision do not have any need