Clair v Munce [2007] NSWSC 419

Clair v Munce [2007] NSWSC 419

The cross-summons sought enforcement of existing legal and equitable rights, including a declaration of indebtedness and accounts between co-owners, rather than an alteration of property interests under the Property (Relationships) Act. Because s 7 preserves remedies under other Acts and laws, the former de facto relationship did not confine the parties to relief under that Act, so the strike-out motion was misconceived.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Equity Division Duty Judge List Proceedings Concerning S 66 G Sale of Co Owned Property and Cross Summons / Notice of Motion by the Plaintiff to Strike Out Paragraphs 4 10 Inclusive of the Defendant's Cross Summons
Outcome
Motion to strike out claims for relief dismissed.
Legal Topics
['appointment of Trustees for Sale' "co Owners' Accounts" 'existing Legal and Equitable Rights Between Former De Facto Partners' 'property (relationships) Act Not Exclusive']
['equity' 'property Law' 'de Facto Relationships'] ['appointment of Trustees for Sale' "co Owners' Accounts" 'existing Legal and Equitable Rights Between Former De Facto Partners' 'property (relationships) Act Not Exclusive']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Equity Division Duty Judge List Proceedings Concerning S 66 G Sale of Co Owned Property and Cross Summons / Notice of Motion by the Plaintiff to Strike Out Paragraphs 4 10 Inclusive of the Defendant's Cross Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the cross-summons claims for indebtedness, accounts, contribution, valuation orders and alternative trust relief had to be brought under the (NSW) Property (Relationships) Act 1984.' 'Whether expiry of time for commencing proceedings under the Property (Relationships) Act without leave justified striking out paragraphs 4-10 of the cross-summons.' 'Whether former de facto partners are limited to remedies under the Property (Relationships) Act.']

Ratio Decidendi

The cross-summons sought enforcement of existing legal and equitable rights, including a declaration of indebtedness and accounts between co-owners, rather than an alteration of property interests under the Property (Relationships) Act. Because s 7 preserves remedies under other Acts and laws, the former de facto relationship did not confine the parties to relief under that Act, so the strike-out motion was misconceived.

Court Disposition

Motion to strike out claims for relief dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The Notice of Motion is dismissed with costs.']