29 Sept 2011
Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal depended on an accepted factual evaluation by the Court of Appeal that the settlement benefits were relationship property; the matter raised no point of general or public importance and did not show a substantial miscarriage of justice, so the interests of justice test was not met.
8 Apr 2009
The Court held the correct legal approach is to apply the family home definition first to the relevant unsubdivided lot(s); if the whole unsubdivided lot qualifies as used wholly or principally for the purposes of the household it is a family home and homestead does not apply; because the High Court applied an incorrect global approach and factual issues remain (notably subdivision status), the appeal is allowed and the matter is remitted to the High Court for rehearing.