Dunstan v Rickwood [2006] NSWDC 119

New South Wales District Court

CITATION: Dunstan v Rickwood [2006] NSWDC 119

HEARING DATE(S): 9-11 October 2006

JUDGMENT DATE: 14 December 2006

JURISDICTION: Civil

JUDGMENT OF: Goldring DCJ

DECISION: 1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed. ; 2. The cross-claim is allowed to the following extent:; a. the plaintiff must transfer his interest in the Ainslie property to the defendant, and, in consequence, I make the orders sought in paragraphs 2-5 inclusive of the cross-claim; and; b. within 28 days, the plaintiff must pay to the defendant the sum of $70 750

CATCHWORDS: Property relationships - Just and Equitable

LEGISLATION CITED: Property (Relationships) Act 1984

Saric v Steward [2006] NSWCA 260 Chanter v Catts [2006] NSWCA 411 CASES CITED: Howlett v Neilson [2005] NSWCA 149 Norbis v Norbis (1968) CLR 513 Kardos v Sarbutt [2006] NSWCA 11 Bilous v Mudaliar [2006] NSWCA 38

PARTIES: Ross Dunstan (Plaintiff/Cross Defendant)) Julie Rickwood (Defendant/Cross Claimant)

FILE NUMBER(S): 942 of 2005

COUNSEL: G. Brsztowski SC (Plaintiff) R. Maurice (Defendant)

SOLICITORS: Crowley Clifford Simpson (Plaintiff) Lessli Strong & Associates (Defendant)

JUDGMENT

1 The plaintiff and the defendant formed a de facto relationship in 1993. This relationship ended in September 2002.

2 The plaintiff seeks an order under the Property (Relationships) Act, 1984 (henceforth "PRA"), s 20. The defendant has made a cross-claim. The issues for determination in these proceedings are:

a. The capital contribution made by each party to the relationship;