Wayne James Smith v Kaye Louise Champion (No 2)
Case
•
[2009] ACTCA 15
•19 October 2009
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Wayne James Smith v Kaye Louise Champion (No 2) [2009] ACTCA 15
[2009] ACTCA 15
19 October 2009
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This case concerned an appeal regarding the proportional allocation of assets in a relationship property dispute. The primary asset in contention was a property known as "Dellwood". The appeal court was required to determine the appropriate division of assets and the allocation of costs, both at trial and on appeal.
The legal issues before the court included whether it possessed the power to award costs for the trial, given that the trial judge had died before making such orders. Additionally, the court had to determine if either party held a preferential right to purchase the property "Dellwood" and, consequently, the correct proportional allocation of assets between the parties.
The court held that it had the power to order costs of the trial under section 37O(1)(b) of the *Supreme Court Act 1933* (ACT). It found that neither party had a preferential right to purchase "Dellwood" and ultimately allocated the assets 59 percent to the appellant and 41 percent to the respondent, taking into account the appellant's contributions. The court ordered that the respondent pay the appellant's costs of the trial on a party and party basis, and that the appellant pay 80 percent of the respondent's costs of the appeal. The appeal was allowed, and the original orders were set aside and replaced with new orders detailing the sale of "Dellwood", the division of proceeds, and the payment of occupation fees and costs.
The legal issues before the court included whether it possessed the power to award costs for the trial, given that the trial judge had died before making such orders. Additionally, the court had to determine if either party held a preferential right to purchase the property "Dellwood" and, consequently, the correct proportional allocation of assets between the parties.
The court held that it had the power to order costs of the trial under section 37O(1)(b) of the *Supreme Court Act 1933* (ACT). It found that neither party had a preferential right to purchase "Dellwood" and ultimately allocated the assets 59 percent to the appellant and 41 percent to the respondent, taking into account the appellant's contributions. The court ordered that the respondent pay the appellant's costs of the trial on a party and party basis, and that the appellant pay 80 percent of the respondent's costs of the appeal. The appeal was allowed, and the original orders were set aside and replaced with new orders detailing the sale of "Dellwood", the division of proceeds, and the payment of occupation fees and costs.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
-
Property Law
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Appeal
-
Remedies
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Appellants v Council of the Law Society of the ACT [2011] ACTSC 133
Cases Citing This Decision
2
B and B S PTY LTD & COUNCIL of the LAW SOCIETY of the ACT & the LEGAL PRACTITIONER (Legal Professions)
[2010] ACAT 43
Appellants v Council of the Law Society of the ACT
[2011] ACTSC 133
Cases Cited
3
Statutory Material Cited
3
Smith v Champion
[2009] ACTCA 7
Kardos v Sarbutt (No 2)
[2006] NSWCA 206
Baker v Towle
[2008] NSWCA 73