Parsons v Storm [2009] NSWCA 288
No error was shown in the trial judge’s exercise of discretion in refusing to adjust the parties’ interests; both parties used proceeds from jointly held property to acquire their own assets, each benefitting accordingly, and it was just and equitable that both retain those benefits. Awarding interest from the time the respondent was kept out of her money was warranted, given both parties contributed to the delay.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 16 September 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- ['de Facto Relationships' 'property Adjustment' 'interest on Judgment' 'equal Contributions' 'discretion Under Property (relationships) Act 1984']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to adjust interests in property between the parties under s 20 of the Property (Relationships) Act 1984' 'Whether the trial judge erred in including interest in the judgment amount']
Ratio Decidendi
No error was shown in the trial judge’s exercise of discretion in refusing to adjust the parties’ interests; both parties used proceeds from jointly held property to acquire their own assets, each benefitting accordingly, and it was just and equitable that both retain those benefits. Awarding interest from the time the respondent was kept out of her money was warranted, given both parties contributed to the delay.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs
Orders
- ['Appeal dismissed' "Appellant to pay respondent's costs"]
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment