RD v DB

[2011] QSC 83

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

RD v DB [2011] QSC 83

PARTIES:

RD
(plaintiff)
v
DB
(defendant)

FILE NO:

7984 of 2008

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Claim

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court of Queensland

DELIVERED ON:

15 April 2011

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

14, 15, 16 March 2011

JUDGE:

Applegarth J

ORDER:

The parties confer in relation to draft orders, and submit minutes of orders within 14 days.

CATCHWORDS:

FAMILY LAW AND CHILD WELFARE – DE FACTO RELATIONSHIPS – ADJUSTMENT OF PROPERTY INTERESTS – GENERALLY – where plaintiff seeks a property adjustment order under Part 19 Property Law Act 1974 – where de facto relationship of more than 13 years.

Property Law Act 1974 (Qld), s 283, s 286

Agius & Agius [2010] FamCAFC 143 cited
BLM v RWS [2006] QCA 528 cited
Cabell & Cabell [2009] FamCAFC 205 cited
EB v CT [2008] QSC 303 cited
FO v HAF [2007] 2 Qd R 138; [2006] QCA 555 applied
In the Marriage of Gill (1984) 9 Fam LR 969 cited
In the Marriage of Pierce (1998) 24 Fam LR 377; [1998] FamCA 74 cited
WB v GSH [2008] QSC 346 cited

COUNSEL:

N B McGregor for the plaintiff
A P J Collins for the defendant

SOLICITORS:

Denise Maxwell Solicitor for the plaintiff
Harrington Family Lawyers for the defendant

Introduction

1. The parties were in a de facto relationship for more than 13 years between early 1994 and late 2007. The plaintiff seeks a property adjustment order under Part 19 of the Property Law Act 1974 (Qld) (“the Act”).

1. The parties are agreed, and I accept, that the four step approach discussed in

   
   FO v HAF

   is appropriate.[1]  This approach involves:

   [1][2007] 2 Qd R 138 at 155; [2006] QCA 555 at [51]-[52].

1.          The identification and valuation of the property, resources and liabilities of the parties.

2. The identification and assessment of the contribution of the parties to their pool of assets and the determination of their contribution-based entitlements in accordance with s 291 to s 295 of the Act.

3. The identification and assessment of the factors in s 297 to s 309 of the Act to determine the adjustment to the contribution-based entitlement.

4. Consideration of the result of these earlier steps to determine whether that result is just and equitable in accordance with s 286 of the Act.

1. There is no dispute about the assets that the parties now own, their current liabilities, or their assets and liabilities at the start of their relationship.  The significant issues requiring resolution are:

·The evaluation of their financial contributions to household and other shared living expenses and to their respective individual expenses;

·The evaluation of their respective contributions to the acquisition, maintenance and improvement of three properties;

·Whether two of those properties, which are owned by the defendant, should remain owned by her, either on an asset-by-asset approach or because they should be “quarantined” on a global approach;

·The appropriate adjustment, if any, of their half-interests in the remaining property.

A…