Segal v Barel

In *Segal v Barel*, the New South Wales Court of Appeal considered a dispute between co-owners of land concerning its future disposition. One co-owner sought the appointment of trustees for partition, while the other sought the appointment of trustees for sale. The primary judge had favoured partition, finding it would be "more beneficial" for the co-owners than sale.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine the nature of the "more beneficial" assessment in the context of partition applications, specifically whether non-financial matters could be considered. It also had to consider the nature of partition in the context of a strata subdivision and whether the equitable co-ownership of common property by lot owners in a strata scheme was compatible with the concept of partition. Furthermore, the Court addressed ancillary matters, including financial adjustments and the taking of accounts to ascertain co-owners' contributions to expenditure that enhanced the land's value.

The Court reasoned that the "more beneficial" assessment under the relevant legislation (likely the *Conveyancing Act 1919* (NSW)) was not confined to purely financial considerations and could encompass non-financial benefits. However, it held that the equitable co-ownership of common property by lot owners in a strata scheme was fundamentally incompatible with partition. This incompatibility meant that partition, in the traditional sense, could not be achieved if each co-owner received one lot in a strata subdivision, as this would not resolve the co-ownership of the common property.

The Court ordered the parties to bring in agreed short minutes of orders giving effect to specific paragraphs of the judgment, and to make written submissions on another paragraph.