Braxton v Braxton [2001] NSWSC 878

Braxton v Braxton [2001] NSWSC 878

The adjustment of the Belrose property's proceeds should be made in accordance with the plaintiff's original proposal—55% to the defendant and 45% to the plaintiff—subject to the plaintiff's caveat debt coming out of his share, as both parties contributed relatively equally to financial and homemaker aspects during the relationship, and subsequent occupation and care circumstances do not justify a more favourable adjustment for the defendant.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Property Adjustment De Facto Relationship / Final Judgment
Outcome
Orders made generally as proposed by the plaintiff; final orders made in accordance with the document headed 'Orders made 4.10.2001'.
Legal Topics
['de Facto Relationships' 'adjustment of Property Interests']
['family Law' 'equity'] ['de Facto Relationships' 'adjustment of Property Interests']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Property Adjustment De Facto Relationship / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an adjustment of property interests should be made between parties to a de facto relationship under the Defacto Relationships Act 1984' 'What proportions of the property (primarily the Belrose home) each party is entitled to, considering contributions made during and after the relationship']

Ratio Decidendi

The adjustment of the Belrose property's proceeds should be made in accordance with the plaintiff's original proposal—55% to the defendant and 45% to the plaintiff—subject to the plaintiff's caveat debt coming out of his share, as both parties contributed relatively equally to financial and homemaker aspects during the relationship, and subsequent occupation and care circumstances do not justify a more favourable adjustment for the defendant.

Court Disposition

Orders made generally as proposed by the plaintiff; final orders made in accordance with the document headed 'Orders made 4.10.2001'.

Orders

  • ["Orders as per document headed 'Orders made 4.10.2001', including division of Belrose property proceeds 55% to defendant and 45% to plaintiff, subject to adjustment for plaintiff's debt secured by caveat." 'Specific items of property (metal working machinery, vehicle, cemetery plot, furniture) to be allocated as...