King v Fister

The case of King v Fister involves a dispute over the beneficial ownership of a property in Cairns. The first respondent, Karen, and her partner, the second respondent, Christopher, purchased a property in their names. The first and second appellants, Andrew and Jodi, contributed to the purchase price and were responsible for the mortgage payments, outgoings, and maintenance. The property was eventually sold, and the appellants sought a declaration that the sale proceeds were held on constructive trust for them. The trial judge found in favour of the appellants, but the respondents appealed, and the appellants cross-appealed.

The legal issues before the court were whether a common intention constructive trust and a joint endeavour constructive trust were established, and whether the respondents had to account for the further withdrawals from the loan account. The court needed to determine if the trial judge's findings were correct and if the respondents should be ordered to pay equitable damages to the appellants.

The court found that the trial judge was correct in establishing a common intention constructive trust and a joint endeavour constructive trust. The court held that the respondents had to account for the further withdrawals from the loan account, as they were not entitled to those funds. The court also found that the respondents had received more than their entitlement from the sale proceeds, and therefore, the appellants were entitled to equitable damages. The court dismissed the respondents' cross-appeal and ordered them to pay the appellants' costs of the proceedings.

The court's final orders were to allow the appeal against the dismissal of the equitable damages claim, award equitable damages in favour of the appellants against the respondents, dismiss the cross-appeal, allow the appeal against the costs order, and order the respondents to pay the appellants' costs of the proceedings including the appeal and cross-appeal on the standard basis.