Fleming v Beevers
| Fleming v Beevers | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Court of Appeal of New Zealand |
| Full case name | Fleming v Beevers |
| Decided | 4 November 1993 |
| Citation | [1994] 1 NZLR 385 |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Cooke P, Gault J, Tipping J |
Fleming v Beevers [1994] 1 NZLR 385 is a cited case in New Zealand law regarding the doctrine of part performance.[1][2][page needed][3][page needed]
Background
[edit]Fleeming and Beevers were in a de facto relationship for over 20 years. In 1989, the couple purchased a house in Queenstown, with Beevers financing his half by cashing in his superannuation policy, and Fleeming borrowing the money for her half, which needed a guarantee from Beevers to secure the loan.
During the conveyancing process, both parties promised to leave their share in the house to the other partner in their will.
Beevers died a few months after buying the house and without drafting a new will. Without a new will, his share of the house would have been disposed under his last will, which left everything to his three children from his previous marriage, with nothing left to Fleeming.
Fleeming sued the estate for Beevers' half share in the house, as well as for a piano that he had promised to leave her.
Held
[edit]The court awarded Fleming the share in the house, but not the piano.
References
[edit]- ^ Walker, Campbell (2004). Butterworths Student Companion Contract (4th ed.). LexisNexis. pp. 75–77. ISBN 0-408-71770-X.
- ^ Chetwin, Maree; Graw, Stephen; Tiong, Raymond (2006). An introduction to the Law of Contract in New Zealand (4th ed.). Thomson Brookers. ISBN 0-86472-555-8.
- ^ Gerbic, Philippa; Lawrence, Martin (2003). Understanding Commercial Law (5th ed.). LexisNexis. ISBN 0-408-71714-9.
 | This article relating to case law in New Zealand is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |