Constable v Bell [2006] NSWSC 45

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Constable v Bell [2006] NSWSC 45

HEARING DATE(S) : 02 & 03/02/06

JUDGMENT DATE : 6 February 2006

JURISDICTION : Equity Division

JUDGMENT OF : White J

DECISION : See para 78 of judgment.

CATCHWORDS : FAMILY LAW - De Facto relationships - Adjusting order under s 20(1) of Property (Relationships) Act, 1984 - 20 year relationship - De facto wife had primary role as homemaker and parent - Almost all assets in de facto husband's name - Contribution to his business - Lump sum ordered - No question of principle.

LEGISLATION CITED : Property (Relationships) Act 1984 (NSW)

Evans v Marmont (1997) 42 NSWLR 70 Chanter v Catts [2005] NSWCA 411 CASES CITED : Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Murry (1998) 193 CLR 605 Dowrick v Sissons (1996) 20 Fam LR 466 Howlett v Neilson (2005) 33 Fam LR 402

Kim Beverly Constable PARTIES : v Mark William Bell

FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 4853/04

COUNSEL : Plaintiff: G Hansen Defendant: P Campton

SOLICITORS : Plaintiff: Browns Family Lawyers Defendant: Martin Bullock Lawyers

- 23 - -IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION

WHITE J

Monday, 6 February 2006

4853/04 Kim Beverly Constable v Mark William Bell JUDGMENT 1 HIS HONOUR: This is an application by both parties for orders under s 20 of the Property (Relationships) Act 1984 (NSW). 2 Ms Constable and Mr Bell were in a de facto relationship for twenty years from 1984 to 2004. They have one child, Samantha, born in 1989. Except for a brief period, Ms Constable was not employed. She had the primary responsibility of homemaker during the course of the relationship and had the primary care of Samantha. Mr Bell worked in a number of jobs and in his own publishing business up to 2001. First as a hobby, and by 2000, as a business, he bred, trained and raced greyhounds. This business was conducted from the parties' home. He received considerable assistance from Ms Constable in this work. 3 The principal assets of the parties are two pieces of real estate owned by Mr Bell. One is the family home at 145 Eighth Avenue, Austral, which has an agreed value of $1,150,000. It is unencumbered. The other is an investment property at 133 Wanawong Street, Belimba Park, which has an agreed value of $500,000 and is subject to a mortgage of $67,991. 4 The defendant acquired these properties as a result of a long series of real estate transactions from before 1984 and up to 2001. He financed these real estate transactions from his initial savings, from a workers' compensation payout he received in 1986 or 1987, through his servicing of borrowings, and from the proceeds of earlier property sales. 5 Subsection 20 (1) of the Act provides: "20 Application for adjustment