DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
Evans v Hollenberg [2024] QDC 56
PARTIES:
SAMANTHA HELEN EVANS
(Applicant)v JASON LEE HOLLENBERG
(Respondent)
FILE NO/S:
BD3176/23
DIVISION:
Civil
DELIVERED ON:
23 April 2024
DELIVERED AT:
Brisbane
HEARING DATE:
15 April 2024
JUDGE:
Barlow KC, DCJ
ORDERS:
The respondent’s application filed on 2 February 2024 be dismissed.
CATCHWORDS:
PROCEDURE – STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS: JURISDICTION, POWERS AND GENERALLY – JURISDICTION – GENERALLY – the applicant and respondent were in a de facto relationship that broke down – during the relationship they bought a property as joint tenants, which was later altered to tenants in common in equal shares - the applicant brought an application for the appointment of statutory trustees for sale and division of the proceeds of sale – the respondent applied, within that application, for an adjustment to the division of proceeds - there is jurisdiction to apply to the Federal Circuit and Family Court in respect of property division between former de facto partners – no such application had been made - an application in the Federal Circuit and Family Court would be out of time – the originating application sought an adjustment of the parties’ rights to the proceeds of sale to allow for payment of the applicant’s costs from the respondent’s share – whether the originating application seeks to alter the parties’ rights to the proceeds of sale - whether originating application is within jurisdiction of the District Court – whether the respondent’s application is within the jurisdiction of the District Court
District Court Act 1967 s 68
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 4
Property Law Act 1974 ss 9A, 38, 39B, 42, 44Emerald & Emerald [2018] FamCAFC 217
JAB v The Executors of the Estate of the late MST [2022] QSC 226
Krasnoff v Krasnoff [2017] QDC 100
Ranger v Ranger [2009] QCA 226COUNSEL:
Ms S K Long for the applicant
Mr S E Fisher for the respondent
SOLICTORS:
Power & Cartwright for the applicant
Stolar Law for the respondent
Between 2009 and 2017, the parties were living together in a de facto relationship. During that relationship, they bought a house. They were registered as joint tenants of the fee simple.
They separated in October 2017. Ms Evans left the property to live elsewhere. Mr Hollenberg remained living in the house and still lives there. Some time later, Ms Evans formally severed the joint tenancy and they became registered as tenants in common in equal shares.
Apparently the parties made several attempts to sell the house, but for reasons unknown to me they did not succeed. On 30 October 2023, Ms Evans filed an originating application seeking the appointment of statutory trustees for the sale of the property. On 1 December 2023, Judge Smith DCJA ordered the appointment of trustees for sale and directed them to sell the property and to hold the net proceeds of sale on trust for the parties in equal shares (subject to one qualification described below) unless, in the…
Continue reading Evans v Hollenberg
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Evans v Hollenberg [2024] QDC 56
- Case
- [2024] QDC 56
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether Hollenberg's application, which sought to alter the division of proceeds from the sale of the jointly-owned property, fell within the jurisdiction of the District Court. The court had to consider whether the application was an attempt to modify the parties' rights to the proceeds of sale, and if so, whether such an application could be entertained by the District Court. Additionally, the court needed to determine whether an application for property division between former de facto partners could be made in the Federal Circuit and Family Court, and if any such application would be out of time.
The court found that Hollenberg's application did seek to alter the division of proceeds by requesting that Evans' costs be paid from Hollenberg's share. This application, in effect, sought to modify the parties' rights to the proceeds of sale. The court held that such an application was not within the jurisdiction of the District Court. Furthermore, it was determined that an application for property division between former de facto partners could be made in the Federal Circuit and Family Court, but any such application would be out of time given the circumstances. Consequently, the court dismissed Hollenberg's application, ruling that it had no jurisdiction over the matter.
The court dismissed Hollenberg's application filed on 2 February 2024, confirming that it was not within the jurisdiction of the District Court.
Orders
Orders of the court
The respondent’s application filed on 2 February 2024 be dismissed.
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.