11 Oct 2021
The Court held the appellant received adequate and independent legal advice required by s 21F prior to signing the COA; the application to adduce additional file notes and a copy of the COA on appeal was declined because the material was not cogent or would unfairly raise a new factual case; the new 'concept/plan' argument could not be raised for the first time on appeal and the appeal was dismissed.
21 Apr 2011
The appeal was dismissed because the High Court found on the balance of probabilities that the appellant had signed the agreement in the presence of the solicitor witness whose evidence was credible, satisfying the statutory execution requirements for a deed, and that although the respondent applied pressure, that pressure was lawful and not illegitimate so as to amount to duress; the appellant had time to consider the agreement, was of mature age, could have sought advice, and acted in accordance with the agreement thereafter, so it was binding.
30 Apr 2009
Leave to appeal was dismissed because, although s 21J(4)(d) permits inquiry into parties' mental states, the factual matrix here (respondent's documented assumptions in the draft agreement and the subsequent breakdown of the relationship) meant the point was not appropriate for further appellate consideration and existing guidance in Harrison is persuasive; accordingly the High Court declined to grant leave.
24 Mar 2009
The appeal is dismissed; the High Court upheld the Family Court's decision to set aside the 19 April 2002 relationship/property agreement under s21J because, having regard to all circumstances (notably the parties' divergent understandings about the relationship, the conversion of a joint business asset into separate property, the claimant's substantial positive contributions, and the valuation-supported disparity between potential accrued entitlement and agreed benefit), giving effect to the agreement would cause serious injustice.