Grant v Grant

The case of Grant v Grant involved a dispute between the husband and wife concerning their property following the breakdown of their marriage. The husband had initiated an equity suit seeking declaratory and other relief regarding the parties' property. The case was settled by way of heads of agreement, with a deed to be executed during mediation. However, the husband refused to execute the deed, prompting the wife to seek specific performance of the agreement. The central legal issues were whether the maintenance agreement fell into the first or third category under Masters v Cameron, whether the agreement was enforceable despite section 86A of the Family Law Act 1975, and whether the agreement was validated by section 29(1) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005. Additionally, the court considered whether the maxim that equity would not allow a statute to be used as a cloak for fraud applied.

The court determined that the maintenance agreement was not a financial agreement as defined in section 4 of the Family Law Act, and thus was not subject to the prohibitions in section 86A. The court also found that the agreement was not invalid under section 29(1) of the Civil Procedure Act. The court held that the husband's refusal to execute the deed constituted a breach of the agreement, and that the wife was entitled to specific performance. The court rejected the husband's argument that the application of the maxim that equity would not allow a statute to be used as a cloak for fraud rendered the agreement unenforceable.

The final orders of the court were that the husband was directed to execute the deed, and that the wife was entitled to an order for specific performance of the agreement. The husband was also ordered to pay the wife's costs of the proceedings. The court's decision emphasised the importance of upholding the terms of agreements reached during mediation, and the role of equity in enforcing such agreements where necessary.