Sudsai v Barbetti & Anor [2008] NSWDC 30

A case about a de facto relationship that had broken down (a relationship where the parties were not married). The break up of the relationship was treated as a divorce in which the plaintiff was awarded part of the property and investment values.

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – De facto relationships – Adjustment of - parties’ property interests – Application under s 20 of Property (Relationships) Act 1984 – Relevant property – Superannuation entitlements - Contributions of financial and non-financial nature – Inheritances – Evaluation of contributions – Proper date to value assets – Valuation of overseas real property – Duration of de facto relationship – Nature of a de facto relationship – Time limit of 2 years within which claim to be brought – Leave available to extend limitation period – Significant post-separation expenditure by one party to the - relationship – Notional add-back of such expenditure into asset pool – Homemaking and parenting roles – Nature and type of orders which may be made – Just and equitable order – Holistic approach – Payment of a lump sum – Sale of real property to secure payment – Transfer of interest in personal property – Principles as to costs of proceedings.
Decision: (1) Plaintiff entitled to adjustment in her favour of 26 per cent of the property interests of the parties valued as at the date of separation in May 2003; (2) First defendant to pay the plaintiff a lump sum of $199,202 within 28 days; (3) Failing the first defendant’s compliance with payment, the first and second defendants take all necessary steps to effect a sale of their property at Chapel Hill in Queensland and to apply the proceeds to satisfy the payment to the plaintiff in (2) hereof plus interest; (4) First defendant to transfer to the plaintiff within 14 days his interest in the ASG Scholarship Fund, Telstra shares and funds held in trust by Paul & Paul, Solicitors, in relation to Qantas shares; (5) Otherwise, the parties be declared the owners of all the assets presently held by them and be solely responsible for all liabilities held in each of their respective names; (6) No order as to the second defendant’s costs; (7) Plaintiff and first defendant to he heard on costs; and (8) Plaintiff to bring into Court short minutes of order.
Judgment Of: Hungerford ADCJ
Date: 18 March 2008
Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005, ss 3 and 98(1) District Court Act 1973, ss 51 and 134 Evidence Act 1995, ss 128 and 132 Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 75(2) and 117 Legal Profession Act 2004, s 364 Marriage Act 1961 (Cth) Property (Relationships Act 1984, ss 3(1), 4, 14(1), 15(1), 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 38 and 42 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, Pt 42 r 42.1 and Pt 42 r 42.30
Jurisdiction: Http