Family Law Newswatch Report
Unmarried couple purchased property in joint names - woman brought claim under TLATA - at first instance the court held that she was entitled to 90% of the value of the property, on the basis that this was fair and just - man appealed - held that there was evidence of conduct from which it was right to conclude that the parties had intended their respective equal shares to alter following the man's departure, but none to indicate how. The only available criterion by which to assess the extent of the alteration was what was objectively fair, and the only judge of that was the court. The first instance judge's attribution of 90% to the woman was justifiable.#
(A full report can now be found here.)
