Trajcevski v Mason

[2017] NSWLC 14

Local Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Trajcevski v Mason [2017] NSWLC 14
Hearing dates:	13 July 2017
Decision date:	31 July 2017
Jurisdiction:	Civil
Before:	Brender LCM
Decision:	The defendant pay to the plaintiff $14,652.50, together with interest pursuant to section 100 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005
Legislation Cited:	Civil Procedure Act 2005, s 100
Cases Cited:	Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571 Darmanin v Cowan [2010] NSWSC 1118 John Holland Pty Ltd v Kellogg Brown & Root Pty Ltd [2015] NSWSC 451 Ottavio v Hayvio Pty Ltd [2011] NSWSC 1125 Toll (FGCT) Pty Ltd v Alphapharm Pty Ltd [2004] HCA 52; (2004) 219 CLR 165 Voce v Deloraine [2012] NSWSC 1187
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Natalie Jane Trajcevski (plaintiff) Gregory John Mason(defendant)
Representation:	Counsel: D Turner (for the defendant)   Solicitors: S Agosta (for the plaintiff) H S Lam (for the defendant)
File Number(s):	2016/235410

Judgment

1. Ms Natalie Trajcevski (the plaintiff) and Mr Gregory Mason (the defendant) met in June 2007 and commenced a romantic relationship. They moved in together in August 2009. The plaintiff’s evidence, which was not contradicted by the defendant, was that they had a conversation in which they agreed to keep their finances separate and they would pay for their own expenses. Initially they decided not to get a joint account and had their own accounts only, however after they commenced to live together they did open a joint bank account for the convenient payment of joint expenses. They had both suffered financially as a result of previous relationships. At the time they started living together the plaintiff received a lump sum of money from her former partner so she was in a better financial position than the defendant. He had a business which did not prosper. She was in employment. But neither had a great deal of money. He used his American Express (Amex) card for business and personal expenses, and to get “points”. She would on occasion reimburse him to his card. They also in due course had a joint account for joint expenses such as rent which either could operate. They both had their own accounts.

2. Initially the plaintiff claimed $29,562.89 by way of 24 loans or advances, reduced by four repayments. This was supported by evidence including particular conversations said to have occurred. Her affidavit was sworn on 12 April 2017. The defendant swore his evidence on 22 March 2017. He did not reply to her affidavit. The plaintiff said in the witness box that after receiving information “by email” she agreed that a number of the claims were not maintainable and she abandoned them. I understood the email was actually the defendant’s affidavit. At the hearing an amended statement of claim was filed without opposition which removed 12 of the claims, reduced one claim and made some adjustments to the repayments. Some of the material in the affidavit in support of the original claim was not read, however was in effect cross examined back into evidence…