NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Waring v Ellis [2005] NSWSC 467
HEARING DATE(S) : 14/03/05; 15/03/05; 16/03/05 and 17/03/05
JUDGMENT DATE : 18 May 2005
JURISDICTION : Equity Division
JUDGMENT OF : Young CJ in Eq
DECISION : Order in favour of plaintiff on trust issue. Additionally order for plaintiff on Property (Relationships) Act case for $81,000.
CATCHWORDS : EQUITY [97]- Joint bank account- Account held by de facto couple- Plaintiff had legal title to lotto winnings- Placed winnings into joint account- Whether de facto relationship and plaintiff's acquiescence meant that winnings were legal property of each- Whether plaintiff lacked intention to share winnings with defendant which gave rise to resulting trust in his favour. ESTOPPEL [43]- Estoppel by acquiescence- Whether plaintiff's silence as to how defendant spent money from joint account could raise estoppel- Silence can only raise estoppel where there is a duty to speak. FAMILY LAW AND CHILD WELFARE [105]- De facto relationships- Existence of relationship- Parties lived together in same house for 12 years- Conflicting evidence as to whether relationship existed. PERSONAL PROPERTY [5]- Lotto ticket- Plaintiff purchased ticket- Purchaser has legal title - Defendant claimed that preexisting arrangement with plaintiff regarding ticket purchases meant she received a share in winnings- Whether subsequent conduct of purchaser gave rise to creation of other beneficial interests in ticket winnings.
LEGISLATION CITED : Property (Relationships) Act 1984, ss 3, 4, 5, 14, 20
Cole v Crain (Young J, 16.8.1989, unreported) Croton v R (1976) 117 CLR 326 Daly v Gilbert [1993] 3 NZLR 731 Jones v Maynard [1951] 1 Ch 572 Pelly v Wathen (1851) De GM & G 16; 42 ER 457 Pickard v Pickard [1981] FLC 91-034; (1981) 7 Fam LR 636 Re Bishop [1965] Ch 450 Re Brease (1997) 22 FAm LR 518 CASES CITED : Re Reid (1998) 85 FCR 452 Re Zyk (1995) 19 Fam LR 797 Russell v Watts (1885) 10 App Cas 590 Smith v McDonnell (Hodgson J, 30.3.1995, unreported) Van Rassel v Kroon (1953) 87 CLR 298 Vitali v Stachnik (2001) DFC 95-235; 28 Fam LR 142 Voulis v Kozary (1975) 180 CLR 177 Waltons Stores (Interstate) Ltd v Maher (1988) 164 CLR 387
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate