NEUMAN & GRIFF - [2019] FCCA 2965

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEUMAN & GRIFF

[2019] FCCA 2965

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Property adjustment – assessment of contributions – orders made.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975, ss.75, 79

Cases cited:

Weir & Weir (1992-1993) 16 Fam LR 154

Lotta & Lotta [2017] FamCA 50

Applicant:

MR NEUMAN

Respondent:

MS GRIFF

File Number:

PAC 3945 of 2018

Judgment of:

Judge Newbrun

Hearing dates:

11 and 12 September 2019

Date of Last Submission:

12 September 2019

Delivered at:

Parramatta

Delivered on:

1 November 2019

REPRESENTATION

Solicitors for the Applicant:

Mr Benetatos

The Respondent appeared in person

ORDERS

Within 56 days of the date of these orders, the Applicant (Mr Neuman) pay the Respondent (Ms Griff) $257,500 and in exchange the Respondent shall do all things necessary to transfer her right, title and interest in the property at A Street, Suburb B (hereafter referred to as ‘the A Street, Suburb B property’) to the Applicant. Contemporaneously, the Applicant shall cause the mortgage currently registered over the A Street, Suburb B property and held with Me Bank to be discharged and refinanced into his name at his expense.
If at the expiration of 56 days from the date of making these orders, the Applicant has failed to pay the Respondent $257,500 and discharge and refinance the A Street, Suburb B property, each party will do all acts and things and execute all documents necessary to place the A Street, Suburb B property for sale at a price agreed by both parties or, failing such agreement, at the average price of two recent market appraisals. Once sold the Applicant shall receive 37.5% of the net sale proceeds and the Respondent shall receive 62.5% of the net sale proceeds.
The Respondent shall retain the C Street, Suburb D property, the land at F Street, Suburb G, her motor vehicle, all funds in her retirement income account, all funds held by financial institutions held solely in her name, and 50% of the balance of the Me Bank joint account.
The Applicant shall retain his superannuation interests, his motor vehicle, all funds held by financial institutions held solely in his name and/or with any person other than the Respondent, the full amount of his redundancy payment, and 50% of the balance of the Me Bank joint account.
The Me Bank joint savings account shall then be closed.
The parties shall otherwise each be entitled to retain all other property currently held in their respective names, possession and/or control.
That in the event that either party refuses or neglects to comply with any part of these Orders in relation to the execution of any deed, instrument or document the Court appoints and authorises the Senior Registrar of the Family Court of Australia, Parramatta Registry, and/or any Registrar or Deputy Registrar thereof to execute such deed, instrument or document in the name of the party who so refuses or neglects and further appoints that Registrar or Deputy Registrar to do all acts and things necessary to…

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 NEUMAN & GRIFF

Details

AGLC: NEUMAN & GRIFF [2019] FCCA 2965
Case: [2019] FCCA 2965
Decision Date: 1 November 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Neuman & Griff, heard by Judge Newbrun, the dispute concerned the adjustment of property between the applicant, Mr Neuman, and the respondent, Ms Griff. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate division of the parties' assets and liabilities following their separation.

The central legal issues before the court were the assessment of the parties' respective contributions to the acquisition, conservation, and improvement of their property, and the determination of a just and equitable distribution of their combined assets. This involved considering both financial and non-financial contributions made by each party throughout the relationship.

Judge Newbrun ordered that Mr Neuman pay Ms Griff $257,500 within 56 days, in exchange for which Ms Griff would transfer her interest in the A Street, Suburb B property to Mr Neuman. Mr Neuman was also required to discharge and refinance the existing mortgage on that property into his name. Should Mr Neuman fail to meet these obligations within the specified timeframe, the A Street, Suburb B property was to be sold, with the net proceeds divided such that Ms Griff received 62.5% and Mr Neuman received 37.5%. The court also made specific orders regarding the retention of other assets, including properties, vehicles, bank accounts, and superannuation interests, by each party, with the Me Bank joint savings account to be closed. Provisions were also made for the execution of necessary documents by the Senior Registrar in the event of non-compliance by either party.

Orders

Orders of the court

Within 56 days of the date of these orders, the Applicant (Mr Neuman) pay the Respondent (Ms Griff) $257,500 and in exchange the Respondent shall do all things necessary to transfer her right, title and interest in the property at A Street, Suburb B (hereafter referred to as ‘the A Street, Suburb B property’) to the Applicant. Contemporaneously, the Applicant shall cause the mortgage currently registered over the A Street, Suburb B property and held with Me Bank to be discharged and refinanced into his name at his expense.

If at the expiration of 56 days from the date of making these orders, the Applicant has failed to pay the Respondent $257,500 and discharge and refinance the A Street, Suburb B property, each party will do all acts and things and execute all documents necessary to place the A Street, Suburb B property for sale at a price agreed by both parties or, failing such agreement, at the average price of two recent market appraisals. Once sold the Applicant shall receive 37.5% of the net sale proceeds and the Respondent shall receive 62.5% of the net sale proceeds.

The Respondent shall retain the C Street, Suburb D property, the land at F Street, Suburb G, her motor vehicle, all funds in her retirement income account, all funds held by financial institutions held solely in her name, and 50% of the balance of the Me Bank joint account.

The Applicant shall retain his superannuation interests, his motor vehicle, all funds held by financial institutions held solely in his name and/or with any person other than the Respondent, the full amount of his redundancy payment, and 50% of the balance of the Me Bank joint account.

The Me Bank joint savings account shall then be closed.

The parties shall otherwise each be entitled to retain all other property currently held in their respective names, possession and/or control.

That in the event that either party refuses or neglects to comply with any part of these Orders in relation to the execution of any deed, instrument or document the Court appoints and authorises the Senior Registrar of the Family Court of Australia, Parramatta Registry, and/or any Registrar or Deputy Registrar thereof to execute such deed, instrument or document in the name of the party who so refuses or neglects and further appoints that Registrar or Deputy Registrar to do all acts and things necessary to give validity and operation to the deed, instrument or document.

Liberty to the parties to apply to the Court on seven days’ notice in relation to the implementation of the above Orders.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.