BERTEI -v- FEHER [2000] WASCA 165
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2000] WASCA 165 | |
| THE FULL COURT (WA) | |||
| Case No: | FUL:85/1999 | 3 FEBRUARY 2000 | |
| Coram: | KENNEDY J IPP J WHEELER J | 19/06/00 | |
| 18 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Appeal allowed Cross-appeal allowed | ||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | KATHLEEN BERTEI REINHARD FEHER |
Catchwords: | Trusts and trustees Resulting trust Whether rebutted Constructive trust Purchase of a house and a unit in the names of a couple who were then engaged to be married Marriage not taking place Properties mortgaged by parties to secure balance or portion of balance of purchase price Payment of all moneys in connection with acquisition of properties and all moneys payable under mortgages made by man Unquantified contributions to household by woman Whether unconscionable for man to assert sole ownership of properties |
Legislation: | Nil |
Case References: | Baumgartner v Baumgartner (1987) 164 CLR 137 Calverley v Green (1984) 155 CLR 242 Davies v Messner (1975) 12 SASR 333 Jenkins v Wynen [1992] 1 Qd R 40 Kais v Turvey (1994) 11 WAR 357 Moate v Moate [1948] 2 All ER 486 Muschinski v Dodds (1985) 160 CLR 583 Napier v Public Trustee (WA) (1981) 55 ALJR 1 Ulrich v Ulrich (1968) 1 WLR 180 Wirth v Wirth (1956) 98 CLR 228 Baars v Brendstrup (1986) DFC 95-029 Cohen v Sellar [1926] 1 KB 536 Lockyer v Simpson (1730) Mos 298; 25 ER 404 Louth v Diprose (1992) 175 CLR 621 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE FULL COURT (WA) CITATION : BERTEI -v- FEHER [2000] WASCA 165 CORAM : KENNEDY J
- IPP J
WHEELER J
- Appellant
AND
REINHARD FEHER
Respondent
Catchwords:
Trusts and trustees - Resulting trust - Whether rebutted - Constructive trust - Purchase of a house and a unit in the names of a couple who were then engaged to be married - Marriage not taking place - Properties mortgaged by parties to secure balance or portion of balance of purchase price - Payment of all moneys in connection with acquisition of properties and all moneys payable under mortgages made by man - Unquantified contributions to household by woman - Whether unconscionable for man to assert sole ownership of properties
Legislation:
Nil
(Page 2)
Result:
Appeal allowed
Cross-appeal allowed
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant : Mr J G Hanly
Respondent : Mr P R Eaton
Solicitors:
Appellant : Hotchkin Hanly
Respondent : Marks & Sands
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Baumgartner v Baumgartner (1987) 164 CLR 137
Calverley v Green (1984) 155 CLR 242
Davies v Messner (1975) 12 SASR 333
Jenkins v Wynen [1992] 1 Qd R 40
Kais v Turvey (1994) 11 WAR 357
Moate v Moate [1948] 2 All ER 486
Muschinski v Dodds (1985) 160 CLR 583
Napier v Public Trustee (WA) (1981) 55 ALJR 1
Ulrich v Ulrich (1968)…
Continue reading Bertei v Feher
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Bertei v Feher [2000] WASCA 165
- Case
- [2000] WASCA 165
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Bertei v Feher involved a dispute over the ownership of two properties, a house and a unit, purchased in the names of the parties who were engaged to be married but did not marry. The central issue before the court was whether the man could maintain sole ownership of the properties after the relationship ended, or whether the woman had a claim to an equitable interest in the properties. The court was required to determine whether the man's resulting trust was rebutted and whether a constructive trust should be imposed in favour of the woman.
The court considered the contributions made by each party towards the acquisition and maintenance of the properties. It found that the man had paid for all the moneys connected with the purchase of the properties and all the moneys payable under the mortgages. However, the court also acknowledged the unquantified contributions made by the woman to the household. The court held that the man's assertion of sole ownership of the properties would be unconscionable given the woman's contributions. The court found that a resulting trust was rebutted and a constructive trust should be imposed in favour of the woman, entitling her to an equitable interest in the properties.
The appeal was allowed, and the cross-appeal was also allowed. The final orders of the court are not detailed in the text.
The court considered the contributions made by each party towards the acquisition and maintenance of the properties. It found that the man had paid for all the moneys connected with the purchase of the properties and all the moneys payable under the mortgages. However, the court also acknowledged the unquantified contributions made by the woman to the household. The court held that the man's assertion of sole ownership of the properties would be unconscionable given the woman's contributions. The court found that a resulting trust was rebutted and a constructive trust should be imposed in favour of the woman, entitling her to an equitable interest in the properties.
The appeal was allowed, and the cross-appeal was also allowed. The final orders of the court are not detailed in the text.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal allowed
Cross-appeal allowed
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.