Landmark High Court ruling set to test prenup reliability - Rossana Court and Angela Petrie making great changes in court
” He was a multi-millionaire property developer, she was his much younger Eastern European bride who spoke little English.
The High Court has this morning set aside their prenuptial agreement in a landmark ruling that lawyers warn will open the doors to fresh legal challenges by other former spouses.”
This article is about a judgement that refers to one of Rossana Court’s biggest cases where they sought to get a Pre-nuptial agreement set aside and won (Zentgraf v Hutchinson). This is a landmark decision that has now been referred to in The High Court, meaning Rossana Court and Angela Petrie (Counsel) were able to pave a path for other’s that were in Ms Zentgraf’s position. Having their case referred to in the High Court reflects the belief they both had in winning the Zentgraf v Hutchinson case and is resounds of the commitment and work put into the 3 year long matter.
Supreme Court of New South Wales, Court of Appeal
Beazley ACJ, Leeming JA and Emmett AJA
The Judges of the Court of
Appeal affirmed a decision ordering the adjustment of the property of a
father-in-law in favour his daughter-in-law on the basis of their ‘close
personal relationship’ within the meaning of the (NSW) Property (Relationships)
Act 1984 s 4.
Xabregas v St George Bank -A Division of Westpac Banking Corporation  NSWSC 200 (Property Law)
v St George Bank - A Division of Westpac Banking Corporation  NSWSC 200
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Real property - caveats - plaintiff was registered proprietor of property as
tenant in common in equal shares - plaintiff sought under s74K Real Property
Act 1900 (NSW) to extend operation of caveat against title to lot in strata
plan and leave to ‘lodge fresh caveats if necessary’ - defendant held
registered first mortgage over property and was in possession of it - bank sold
property at auction - plaintiff claimed bank had engaged in improper exercise
of power of sale - held: plaintiff failed to establish grounds to restrain
contract for sale’s completion - not appropriate to grant leave under s74O to
lodge further caveat - leave refused