The case of Turner v. Turner [2023] NSWSC 2287 demonstrates the complexities involved in dividing investment properties during a property settlement. This case involved a substantial asset pool, including multiple investment properties, leading to a lengthy legal battle and significant financial consequences for both parties.
Richard and Claire Turner were married for 20 years and owned several investment properties, including two residential properties in Randwick, Sydney, valued at $3 million and $2.5 million respectively, and a commercial property in Parramatta valued at $4 million. Upon separation, both parties sought to retain the investment properties, leading to a dispute over their division and the handling of other jointly owned assets. Richard argued that he had made more significant financial contributions, while Claire contended that her non-financial contributions as a homemaker and property manager should be considered.
Richard, a corporate lawyer, was determined to retain the investment properties, believing that his substantial financial contributions throughout the marriage entitled him to a larger share of the assets. He felt frustrated and justified in his claim, seeing the properties as crucial to his financial security. His emotional state was marked by defensiveness and anger, willing to endure the prolonged litigation to secure his desired outcome.
Claire, a homemaker and part-time property manager, felt deeply undervalued by Richard's refusal to acknowledge her contributions to the management and maintenance of the investment properties. She believed her non-financial contributions and her role in managing the properties should be recognized in the property division. Her desperation grew as she feared being left without adequate financial security and took legal action to ensure her contributions were acknowledged.
The case proceeded to the NSW Supreme Court, where both parties presented evidence of their financial and non-financial contributions to the investment properties. The court also considered the future needs of both parties, including their income-earning capacity, age, health, and care responsibilities.
The court found that both parties had made significant contributions to the investment properties, both financially and non-financially. However, the court recognized Claire’s non-financial contributions as a property manager and her future needs, including her limited income-earning capacity. The court ordered that the residential properties be sold and the proceeds be divided, with Claire receiving 55% and Richard receiving 45%. The commercial property was retained by Richard, who compensated Claire for her share.
The court proceedings lasted over 24 months, resulting in substantial legal fees and costs for both parties. The court’s decision to sell the residential properties and divide the proceeds led to a significant financial adjustment, with Richard retaining a smaller portion of the assets than he had anticipated.
The legal costs associated with the dispute exceeded $350,000, significantly impacting both parties' financial positions. The prolonged litigation also caused delays in accessing the funds, further affecting their financial stability.
The Turner v. Turner case illustrates the complexities involved in dividing investment properties in property settlements. It demonstrates the importance of considering all contributions and future needs, understanding the court’s approach, and seeking legal advice to navigate the process effectively.
Government Resources
Non-Profit Organizations
Women's Legal Service NSW – Advice on Investment Property Issues: https://www.wlsnsw.org.au
Justice Connect – Legal Resources on Investment Properties: https://justiceconnect.org.au/resources/investment-properties/
Relationships Australia – Support for Property Settlement Disputes: https://www.relationships.org.au
Community Legal Centres NSW – Family Law Guidance: https://www.clcnsw.org.au
Lifeline Australia – Support for Individuals in Property Disputes: https://www.lifeline.org.au