16 Jun 2009
FRASER V BUXTON CA CA166/2009
- Citation
- openlaw-46c4b66a_cde9_4f4f_8557_d97066e5cf45.pdf
- Court
- Court of Appeal
Special leave was refused because the case turned on an unusual, fact‑specific matrix: the funds were separate property and there was no consent to intermingling under s10(2); equitable tracing principles are not plainly applicable in relationship property intermingling cases; the trust transfers were properly characterised as advances given the trust deed terms and indemnity, and the High Court's factual findings were open to it, so no sufficient public importance or error justified a second appeal.