M v T

[2006] QDC 300

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

M v T [2006] QDC 300

PARTIES:

M

Applicant

and

T

Respondent

FILE NO:

204/2005

PROCEEDING:

Trial

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court Southport

DELIVERED ON:

25 August 2006

DELIVERED AT:

Southport

HEARING DATE:

18 & 19 April 2006

JUDGE:

Newton DCJ

ORDER:

Application dismissed

CATCHWORDS:

FAMILY LAW AND CHILD WELFARE – DE FACTO RELATIONSHIPS – LEGISLATION – where applicant and respondent lived in separate sections of one house where the respondent provided financial support to the applicant – where the applicant provided some domestic assistance to the respondent – where the applicant and the respondent shared some meals together – where some acts of sexual intimacy occurred between the applicant and the respondent – where the respondent had sought a close personal relationship with the applicant – where the applicant had rejected the attempts by the respondent to engage in a close personal relationship – whether the applicant and the respondent were “living together on a genuine domestic basis” within the meaning of s 32DA of the Acts Interpretation Act 1954 (Qld).

Acts Interpretation Act 1954
Property Law Act 1974

Cases cited:
Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298
S v B [2004] QCA 449

COUNSEL:

Mr J O’Neill – applicant   

Mr R Galloway -  respondent

SOLICITORS:

Douglas Law – applicant   

K L King & Associates – respondent

1. The applicant seeks the following orders:

   (1)An order pursuant to s 286 of the Property Law Act 1974 adjusting the interests of the applicant and the respondent in property held by them as is just and equitable;

   (2)An order that the respondent hold any interest in any property of which she is a registered owner on constructive trust for the applicant, in the proportions of 50 per cent to the applicant and 50 per cent to the respondent.

2. The applicant, whose date of birth is 9 July 1959, claims to have commenced living together in a de facto relationship with the respondent, whose date of birth is 10 March 1963, within the meaning of s 261 of the Property Law Act 1974 in December 2000. The respondent denies that the parties were at any time in a de facto relationship.

The Evidence of the Applicant

1. In her affidavit filed on 21 April 2005, the applicant states that the parties had been friends for some 10 years prior to commencing cohabitation in December 2000.  From that date the parties lived together firstly at a house rented by the applicant at 3 Lotus Key, Broadbeach Waters and subsequently at a property situated at 15 Pacific Boulevard, Broadbeach Waters.  The applicant claims that the last-mentioned property was purchased by herself and the respondent.  The parties separated on October 2004 when the applicant left the house at Pacific Boulevard.

1. The applicant estimates that at the commencement of the relationship the parties had the following property, financial resources and liabilities:

   Applicant:      (i)        Cash at bank  $  2,000

   (ii)       Motor vehicle  $  8,000

   (iii)      Furniture & furnishings         $  5,000

   (iv)       Credit card debt owing…