Separovich v Ferrao

The appeal concerned a dispute between the parties, Separovich and Ferrao, regarding the adjustment of their interests in property following the breakdown of their de facto relationship. The matter came before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales, constituted by Beazley, McColl, and Macfarlan JJA.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the trial judge erred in making an order for the adjustment of property interests under section 20 of the *Property (Relationships) Act 1984* (NSW), specifically whether the order was just and equitable, and whether the trial judge failed to adequately set out the asset pool and resources of the parties. The significance of money from joint bank accounts being spent on gambling activities was also a consideration.

The Court of Appeal found no error in the trial judge's assessment of the parties' contributions. It was held that the trial judge had made reference to all of the assets of the parties and that the determination involved an exercise of discretion, with no requirement for the Court to deal with assets in a particular manner. The Court affirmed that the trial judge's determination was a just and equitable exercise of discretion.

The appeal against the primary property adjustment orders was dismissed. The Court ordered that upon payment of $160,000 by the defendant to the plaintiff, the plaintiff was to transfer her interest in a property at Quinalup Street, Gwandalan, and the defendant was to arrange the discharge of a mortgage. The defendant was also ordered to indemnify the plaintiff regarding her liability under the mortgage from 24 March 2010. The final determination of the appeal concerning costs was stood over pending further submissions from the parties.