Nolan v Nolan

In Nolan v Nolan, the parties were involved in a protracted dispute concerning the division of assets accumulated through a farming enterprise. The first appellant was the son of the second and third appellants, and the fourth appellant was a company effectively controlled by the first, second, and third appellants. The respondent had been married to the first appellant for eighteen years before their separation. The family had run the farming enterprise together, leading to the primary judge imposing a constructive trust over the assets of the farming enterprise. The respondent was awarded 25 per cent of the net value of those assets, interest on that sum, and costs on an indemnity basis. The appellants challenged the division of the assets, the respondent's entitlement to interest on any sum, and the costs awarded. The legal issues in this case were whether the primary judge's apportionment of the assets was appropriate, considering the family agreements and contributions to the joint enterprise.

The court held that the primary judge did not adequately assess the respective proportions of each party's contribution to the common endeavour, and the evidence led at the trial was insufficient to allow for a proper assessment. The court found that the primary judge's apportionment of the assets was not appropriate. The appeal was allowed, and the cross-appeal was dismissed. The orders made on 11 December 2014 were set aside, and the second, third, and fourth appellants were to pay the respondent the sum of $319,050. The court also ordered the appellants to indemnify the respondent in respect of her liability under the guarantee and indemnity in favour of the National Australia Bank. The court declared that the appellants hold certain properties and any proceeds of sale on trust for the respondent to the extent of $319,050.

In summary, the court found that the primary judge's division of the assets was not appropriate and ordered the appellants to pay the respondent a specific sum, indemnify her in respect of her liability under the guarantee and indemnity, and hold certain properties on trust for the respondent. The parties were also required to file and serve written submissions on the costs of the trial and the appeal within seven days of the date of this order.