Legal Battle Over House

Published in the Coffs Coast News Of The Area on 29 November 2024.

Robert enters into a de facto relationship with Wendy.

Six years after Robert and Wendy commence their relationship, Robert receives a $1 million inheritance from his father’s estate. Later that year, Robert and Wendy buy a house and move in together.

A few years pass before their relationship sours and Wendy moves out.

Robert continues to occupy the house before he unexpectedly passes-away. He does not have a will.

John, Robert’s son from a previous relationship, sees a solicitor regarding his father’s estate. A Title Search is conducted, which reveals that the house is still registered in Robert and Wendy’s joint names. John is advised that the ownership of the house will now pass to Wendy by way of “survivorship”.

John is also advised that because Robert was not married and was not in a de facto relationship when he passed away, that John is entitled to the whole of his late father’s estate but because the house was owned as “joint tenants”, it does not form part of the estate and will pass to Wendy. There are no other assets of any significant value in the estate.

John commences action in the Supreme Court, seeking orders that Wendy holds the house on “resulting trust” for Robert’s estate on the basis that Robert paid the bulk of the purchase price.

The legal principle is that the “beneficial” ownership of property should be reflected by the owners’ contributions to the purchase price. Although “gifting” presumptions exist, which restrict the application of the principle to spouses and children, there are no such presumptions that exist in relation to de facto couples.

A careful analysis of bank statements and loan documents show that Robert contributed 83.75% of the purchase price.

The Court concludes that Robert had the benefit of a resulting trust and makes a declaration recognising his 83.75% interest, which passes to his estate and ultimately to John pursuant to the rules of intestacy.

This fictional column is only accurate at today’s date and is not legal advice.