Hewson v Deans - [2020] NZHC 1465

NOTE: ANY REPORT OF THIS PROCEEDING MUST COMPLY WITH SS 11B, 11C AND 11D OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT 1980.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NAPIER REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA AHURIRI ROHE

CIV-2019-441-000079

[2020] NZHC 1465

IN THE MATTER of the Property (Relationships) Act 1976

BETWEEN

HEWSON

Appellant

AND

DEANS

Respondent

Hearing: 8 June 2020

Appearances:

A J Davies and E Stannard for the Appellant B A J Taylor and I Squire for the Respondent

Judgment:

26 June 2020

JUDGMENT OF COOKE J

Table of Contents

Approach on appeal[4]

Relevance of misconduct[7]

First issue: Tax liability[17]

Mr Hewson’s misconduct[21]

Was the debt incurred for the benefit of the relationship?[24]

The burden of proof[33]

Conclusion on tax liability[41]

Second issue: Student loan[42]

Third issue: Child support[50]

Fourth issue: Unequal division[56]

Post-separation contributions[64]

Fifth issue: Value of Mitsubishi Challenger[73]

Conclusions[77]

HEWSON v DEANS [2020] NZHC 1465 [26 June 2020]

[1] Mr Hewson appeals against the decision of the Family Court determining the division of property under the Property (Relationships) Act 1976 (the Act) following the dissolution of the relationship he had with Ms Deans.1

[2] The parties were in a qualifying relationship from November 2012 until their separation in May 2017. They were married on 8 February 2013, and had two children during the marriage. Mr Hewson is a commercial driver who had previously worked in the building industry, and who would often work overseas for a variety of foreign companies. Ms Deans is a police officer. They commenced living together in Auckland but moved to the Hawkes Bay prior to the birth of their first child. Judge Callinicos recorded that the marriage ended on bitter terms and that the acrimony had continued into the hearing before him. There have been disputes about a number of matters.

[3] On appeal Mr Hewson challenges particular conclusions of the Family Court, and the consequential orders on the division of the property. These are:

(a)That Mr Hewson’s liability for unpaid income tax in the amount of
$141,518 was a personal debt, and not a relationship debt under s 20 of the Act.

(b)That under s 23E of the Act Ms Deans was entitled to a credit adjustment of $7,473.27 for payments made from relationship property in the amount of $14,946.55 to reduce Mr Hewson’s student loan.

(c)That Mr Hewson pay the respondent a lump sum child support payment of $9,596.40 in relation to an uplift of child support under s 32 of the Act.

(d)That there be an unequal division of the family home with 60 per cent to be awarded to Ms Deans and 40 per cent to Mr Hewson under s 13 of the Act.

1 Hewson v Deans [2019] NZFC 7809. The names of the parties have been changed to protect their identity under s 35A of the Property (Relationships) Act 1976 and ss 11B to 11D of the Family Court Act 1980.

(e)That post-separation compensation in the amount of $27,500 be awarded to Ms Deans under…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Hewson v Deans

Details

AGLC: Hewson v Deans [2020] NZHC 1465
Case: [2020] NZHC 1465
Decision Date: 26 June 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Hewson v Deans, the High Court of New Zealand addressed an appeal concerning the division of property under the Property (Relationships) Act 1976 following the dissolution of the relationship between Mr Hewson and Ms Deans. Mr Hewson challenged several decisions made by the Family Court, including the classification of certain debts, the unequal division of the family home, and the valuation of a Mitsubishi Challenger vehicle. The court considered the relevance of misconduct by Mr Hewson, the burden of proof in relation to the tax liability, and the discretion in awarding post-separation contributions. The High Court found errors in the Family Court’s application of the Act, particularly in relation to the classification of the tax liability and the unequal division of the family home. It affirmed the Family Court’s decisions on the student loan, child support, and post-separation contributions, and dismissed the appeal in relation to the valuation of the vehicle. The court made consequential adjustments to the division of the family home and the relationship debts, reserving leave to address any calculation questions that might arise. Costs were to lie where they fell unless a party sought a review.

Orders