PROPERTY LAW ACT 1958 - SECT 233 Orders as to compensation and accounting
PROPERTY LAW ACT 1958 - SECT 233
Orders as to compensation and accounting(1) In any proceeding under this Division, VCAT may order—
(a) that compensation or reimbursement be paid or made by a co‑owner to another co‑owner or other co‑owners;
(b) that one or more co-owners account to the other co-owners in accordance with section 28A;
(c) that an adjustment be made to a co‑owner's interest in the land or goods to take account of amounts payable by co‑owners to each other during the period of the co-ownership.
(2) In determining whether to make an order under subsection (1), VCAT must take into account the following—
(a) any amount that a co-owner has reasonably spent in improving the land or goods;
(b) any costs reasonably incurred by a co‑owner in the maintenance or insurance of the land or goods;
(c) the payment by a co-owner of more than that co-owner's proportionate share of rates (in the case of land), mortgage repayments, purchase money, instalments or other outgoings in respect of that land or goods for which all the co-owners are liable;
(d) damage caused by the unreasonable use of the land or goods by a co-owner;
(e) in the case of land, whether or not a co‑owner who has occupied the land should pay an amount equivalent to rent to a co‑owner who did not occupy the land;
(f) in the case of goods, whether or not a co‑owner who has used the goods should pay an amount equivalent to rent to a co‑owner who did not use the goods.
(3) VCAT must not make an order requiring a co‑owner who has occupied the land to pay an amount equivalent to rent to a co-owner who did not occupy the land unless—
(a) the co-owner who has occupied the land is seeking compensation, reimbursement or an accounting for money expended by the co‑owner who has occupied the land in relation to the land; or
(b) the co-owner claiming an amount equivalent to rent has been excluded from occupation of the land; or
(c) the co-owner claiming an amount equivalent to rent has suffered a detriment because it was not practicable for that co-owner to occupy the land with the other co-owner.
(4) VCAT must not make an order requiring a co‑owner who has used goods to pay an amount equivalent to rent to a co-owner who did not use the goods unless—
(a) the co-owner who has used the goods is seeking compensation, reimbursement or an accounting for money expended by the co‑owner who has used the goods in relation to the goods; or
(b) the co-owner claiming an amount equivalent to rent has been excluded from using the goods; or
(c) the co-owner claiming an amount equivalent to rent has suffered a detriment because it was not practicable for that co-owner to use the goods with the other co-owner.
(5) This section applies despite any law or rule to the contrary.
Division 3—Accounting
New s. 234 inserted by No. 71/2005 s. 5.