An order for sale under s 38 of the Property Law Act 1974 (Qld) is not inevitable where the co-owner resisting sale has potential competing claims, including an application for leave to bring a property adjustment order under s 288(2) (even if out of time) or a defence based on proprietary estoppel. A court exercising discretion to refuse an adjournment on the basis that the outcome is inevitable commits appellable error if it proceeds on an incomplete understanding of the legal options available to the party seeking the adjournment. For de facto relationships that ended before the commencement of the Family Law Amendment (De Facto Financial Matters and Other Measures) Act 2008 (Cth), property adjustment applications are governed by Part 19 of the Property Law Act 1974 (Qld), not the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.