Jones v Stacpoole - [2002] NSWSC 907

CITATION: Jones v Stacpoole [2002] NSWSC 907

CURRENT JURISDICTION: Equity

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 2198/2001

HEARING DATE(S): 19 & 20 September 2002

JUDGMENT DATE: 4 October 2002

PARTIES :

Noelene Ann Jones
(Plaintiff)
Raymond Stacpoole
(Defendant)

JUDGMENT OF: Acting Master Berecry

COUNSEL :
Ms C Conomos
(Plaintiff)
Mrs R Ashes
(Defendant)

SOLICITORS:
Vizzone Ruggero & Associates
(Plaintiff)
Birch Partners
(Defendant)

CATCHWORDS: Property (Relationships) Act - long relationship - children of relationship - distinct period of relationship - contribution of proceeds of damages claim - inference to be taken from use of contribution in the absence of specific evidence - post separation contribution

LEGISLATION CITED: Property (Relationships) Act 1984 - s 20

CASES CITED: Re Marriage of Rolfe (1978) 26 ALR 219
Mallet v Mallet (1984) 156 CLR 605
Gazzard v Winders (1998) 23 FamLR 716
Fuller v Taaffe 23 FamLR 702 at 712
Flett v Brough (NSWSC, unreported, McLaughlin M, 20 November 1998)
Wallace v Stanford (1995) 37 NSWLR 1
Evans v Marmont (1997) 42 NSWLR 70

DECISION: See para 44

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
EQUITY DIVISION

ACTING MASTER BERECRY

FRIDAY, 4 OCTOBER 2002

2198/2001 - NOELENE ANN JONES v RAYMOND STACPOOLE

JUDGMENT

1 MASTER: On 12 April 2001 the plaintiff filed a statement of claim seeking orders pursuant to s 20 of the Property (Relationships) Act 1984. In essence the plaintiff seeks to have the property known as 344 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Scarborough transferred to her within in 42 days upon her making payment to the defendant of the sum equivalent to $200,000.00.

2 On 1 June 2001 the defendant filed a defence and cross claim. The cross claim seeks an order that the defendant pay to the plaintiff within 90 days the sum of $50,000.00. Upon payment of that sum the plaintiff be ordered to transfer her interests in the Scarborough property to the defendant. The defendant also seeks ancillary orders in the cross claim.

3 The parties commenced to live together in a defacto relationship in 1987. The plaintiff asserts that the relationship commenced in March of that year, whereas the defendant asserts that the relationship commenced in September of that year. In any event, in makes little difference to the duration of the relationship. Both parties agree that the relationship ended on 17 January 2001. Therefore, the relationship lasted some 13 years.

4 At the commencement of the relationship the parties had the following assets.

The plaintiff

5 Household furniture and chattels with the an estimated value of $5,000.00. A personal injury claim in respect of injuries she sustained in a motor vehicle accident in 1985.

(1) A block of land at Margaret River, Western Australia valued at $16,500.00.

(2) A house on land at 315 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Clifton. Estimated value $45,000.00.

(3) Household furniture. Estimated value $1,000.00.

6 When the relationship commenced the defendant moved in with the plaintiff. At that time she was renting accommodation at 20 Goodrich Street, Scarborough. The weekly rental was $40.00. It…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Jones v Stacpoole

Details

AGLC: Jones v Stacpoole [2002] NSWSC 907
Case: [2002] NSWSC 907
Decision Date: 4 October 2002

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The dispute between Jones and Stacpoole arose from a claim by Jones for a contribution to the proceeds of a damages claim, which arose from a motor vehicle accident. Jones and Stacpoole had a de facto relationship for 16 years, during which they had four children. The court was required to determine whether the relationship qualified as a "long relationship" under the Property (Relationships) Act, as well as whether the proceeds of the damages claim could be considered as property of the relationship. Additionally, the court needed to decide whether the contributions made by either party during the relationship were to be considered when determining the distribution of property.

The court considered the duration of the relationship and the existence of children as factors in determining whether the relationship qualified as a "long relationship". The court found that the relationship did indeed qualify as such. Regarding the contribution of the proceeds of the damages claim, the court noted that Jones had made a specific claim for a contribution from Stacpoole. The court held that, in the absence of specific evidence, the inference could be drawn that the proceeds of the damages claim were considered property of the relationship. The court also held that post-separation contributions could be taken into account when determining the distribution of property.

Ultimately, the court found that the proceeds of the damages claim were property of the relationship, and a contribution should be made by Stacpoole. The exact amount of the contribution was to be determined by the court at a later date. The court ordered that Stacpoole pay a contribution to Jones from the proceeds of the damages claim, to be determined in a subsequent hearing.

Orders