Parsons v Storm

The appeal concerned a dispute between former de facto partners, Parsons and Storm, following the cessation of their relationship. The primary issue was whether an adjustment of interests in property was warranted under the *Property (Relationships) Act 1984* (NSW). The primary judge had found that no such adjustment was necessary, leading to the dismissal of the appellant's claim for an adjustment.

The court was required to determine whether the primary judge had erred in exercising their discretion by finding that no injustice or inequity arose from the property arrangements following the relationship's end. Specifically, the court considered whether the primary judge correctly assessed the parties' respective contributions and the fairness of the property division, particularly in light of subsequent acquisitions and capital profits derived from jointly held land. The inclusion of interest on a relevant amount in the judgment was also a point of contention.

The appellate court upheld the primary judge's decision, finding no error in the exercise of discretion. The reasoning focused on the fact that both parties had acquired further land using resources from their jointly held property, and that one party had realised a capital profit while the other's land had increased in value. The court concluded that these developments did not create an injustice or inequity that necessitated a further adjustment of interests. Consequently, the cross-claim for half the proceeds of the sale of the jointly held land was upheld, and the inclusion of interest was also deemed a proper exercise of discretion.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.