Under two years together, but she had sold her only property

Ms Day and Mr Jacobsen, in their fifties when the case was heard, lived together as a de facto couple from about October 2017 to about August 2019, less than two years. Both were of modest means. He came into the relationship with about $236,000 in cash from an estate, part of a house and some vehicles. Her only significant asset was a small property.

For a de facto couple, the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) normally requires two years together, or a child, before the court can divide property. Another way in, under s 90SB(c), is to show that the applicant made substantial contributions and that refusing an order would cause her serious injustice. Mr Jacobsen asked the court to dismiss her case on that ground.

Judge Newbrun found that she had sold her property in December 2018 and that the net proceeds of $51,575 were paid to him. He repaid only $10,000. She had also helped clean up the property he bought and cared for their animals. Given how little either of them had, the judge found her contributions were substantial and that it would be a serious injustice to make no order. The court made the declaration.

The judge then took the property each of them held at the end of the relationship, leaving out her old debts and things bought after separation. That came to $185,250: his house, a mobile home, a car, a motorbike, a caravan, and her animals, with each keeping their own super. Most of it had been bought with his pre-relationship cash. Weighing everything, the judge assessed contributions at 15% to her and 85% to him, with no further adjustment for their circumstances.

He was ordered to pay her $27,787 within three months. The two cats and two dogs she had brought into the relationship stayed with him, because he had cared for them alone for almost three years since separation.