Bauer & Nolan (No 4)

Bauer & Nolan (No 4) involved a dispute between the parties over the end date of their de facto relationship, which had implications for the division of their property and assets. The respondent argued that the relationship ended by December 2016, while the applicant maintained that it ended in July 2018. The court had to determine the end date of the relationship and the assets available for division, including the valuation of properties and inheritances received during the relationship. The applicant owned the Suburb S property, while the respondent owned the Suburb U and Town W properties. A property at Suburb Q was purchased with proceeds from the dissolution of their partnership.

The legal issues before the court included the valuation of the Suburb Q, Suburb S, and Town W properties, the respondent's entitlement to her late mother's estate, the application of the proceeds from the sale of the Suburb U property, the treatment of the applicant's superannuation pension, and the appropriate quantum of bank accounts, superannuation interests, and legal fees. The court had to determine whether to accept the single expert's conclusions on the value of the properties and whether to include the respondent's inheritance as an asset. The court also had to decide how to treat paid legal fees and whether to consider other funds as notional assets for the purpose of adjusting the parties' assets.

The court accepted the single expert's valuation of the Suburb Q property at $1,450,000 and the highest and best use valuation of the Suburb S property at $2,630,000. The court determined that the respondent had a present entitlement to funds from her late mother's estate and included them as an asset. The court found that the respondent had applied the proceeds of the Suburb U property sale to her own benefit and ordered her to account for it. The court treated the applicant's superannuation pension as a notional asset and determined the appropriate quantum of bank accounts, superannuation interests, and legal fees. The court ordered the respondent to pay the applicant $50,000 towards the applicant's legal costs.

In conclusion, the court determined the end date of the de facto relationship and the assets available for division. The court accepted the single expert's valuation of the properties and included the respondent's inheritance as an asset. The court ordered the respondent to account for the proceeds of the Suburb U property sale and treated the applicant's superannuation pension as a notional asset. The court ordered the respondent to pay the applicant $50,000 towards the applicant's legal costs.