4 Oct 2011
SB V DC HC AK CIV-2011-404-1005
- Citation
- openlaw-170e38cf_472b_402f_9df1_c16a1f52d52b.pdf
- Court
- High Court
The High Court upheld the Family Court's factual findings that the property purchased in 1984 was acquired in contemplation of marriage and intended for the parties' common use and benefit, that rental income was relationship property, and that the delay to marriage was explicable; the appeal was dismissed. The Family Court's refusal to hear submissions on costs was remitted for reconsideration because the pre-trial Calderbank offer should have been able to be addressed before a costs decision was made.