GAC v CNT

GAC and CNT were in a de facto relationship and entered into a separation agreement. GAC sought to enforce the terms of the agreement, while CNT sought to have the agreement set aside on various grounds. The primary legal issues before the court were whether the separation agreement was a recognised agreement under the Property Law Act 1974 (Qld) Pt 19, and if CNT's signing of the agreement was vitiated due to lack of legal capacity, unconscionable bargain, economic duress, or a conflict of interest by GAC’s solicitor. Additionally, the court had to consider CNT’s request for leave to apply out of time for a property adjustment order.

The court found that the separation agreement was a recognised agreement under the Property Law Act, and that CNT was not entitled to have it set aside. The court dismissed CNT’s claims of lack of legal capacity, unconscionable bargain, economic duress, and conflict of interest. The court held that CNT had not demonstrated any evidence to support her claims of lack of legal capacity or unconscionable bargain. Furthermore, the court found that there was no economic duress, and the alleged conflict of interest by GAC’s solicitor did not vitiate the agreement. The court also refused CNT’s request for leave to apply out of time for a property adjustment order.

The court ordered that GAC recover possession of the property, CNT vacate the property by a specified date, and that the amounts owing under the separation agreement be paid. The court also ordered that the moneys due and owing by GAC to CNT be set off against the moneys owing by CNT to GAC. The difference between the two amounts was to be paid by GAC to McKays Solicitors trust account and applied towards CNT’s assessed costs, with any balance paid to CNT.

The court awarded costs to GAC on the standard basis.