JOHNSON v BUDERUS [1998] NSWCA 118

JOHNSON v BUDERUS [1998] NSWCA 118

Given the Master's findings of credit and fact concerning the respondent's contributions, no error of principle or miscarriage of discretion was shown in the property adjustment or costs orders. The appeal could not succeed against the fact-finding, and the discretionary orders for property adjustment and indemnity costs were properly made under the Act.

Parties
Appellant: Johnson; Respondent: Buderus
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 March 1998
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
De Facto Relationship, Maintenance, Property Adjustment, Appeal Against Discretionary Judgment
Family Law Appeals De Facto Relationship Maintenance Property Adjustment Appeal Against Discretionary Judgment

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johnson

Appellant

Buderus

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the primary judge erred in assessing contributions to property during a de facto relationship
  2. 2 Whether the discretionary judgment pursuant to s20 of the De Facto Relationships Act 1984 was erroneous or excessive
  3. 3 Whether order for indemnity costs was improperly made

Ratio Decidendi

Given the Master's findings of credit and fact concerning the respondent's contributions, no error of principle or miscarriage of discretion was shown in the property adjustment or costs orders. The appeal could not succeed against the fact-finding, and the discretionary orders for property adjustment and indemnity costs were properly made under the Act.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.