Choate & Choate and Ors

This matter concerned a property settlement dispute between a husband and wife, heard by Coleman J. The primary dispute revolved around the division of assets, particularly the former matrimonial home, and the extent to which various contributions, both financial and non-financial, made by each party during and after the marriage should be taken into account.

The court was required to determine the appropriate division of the parties' property, considering their initial and ongoing contributions during cohabitation, as well as any post-separation contributions. Furthermore, the court needed to assess whether any adjustment was warranted under section 75(2) of the relevant legislation, taking into account factors such as the husband's financial circumstances and the evidence presented regarding his family's support.

Coleman J found that the parties had contributed equally during their cohabitation, noting the wife's role in enabling her university studies and the husband's significant improvements to the property, facilitated by the wife's higher income. The court also acknowledged the wife's efforts in marketing and selling a property, saving commission, and her provision of rent-free accommodation. No adjustment was made for post-separation contributions, as the husband's financial evidence was unsatisfactory, and he had benefited from living with his parents. An adjustment was made in the wife's favour under section 75(2) due to the husband's and his father's inconsistent evidence regarding expectations of family support for unpaid work, and the lack of documentation for trusts of which the husband was a beneficiary, which disentitled him to "undue caution" in this regard.

The court ordered that the wife pay the husband $327,607 within 90 days, upon which the husband was to transfer his interest in the H property to the wife, who would then indemnify him against all liabilities associated with it. In the event of non-payment, the H property was to be sold, with proceeds divided 68.4% to the wife and 31.6% to the husband after expenses and the line of credit were paid. The parties were to hold title to the H property as tenants in common in these shares from the date of the orders. Each party was to retain their other property absolutely, and all outstanding applications and costs applications were dismissed, with costs reserved.