In Russo v Russo (No 2) (2026) NSWSC 311, the NSW Supreme Court clarified the process for resolving disputes between co-owners following a court-ordered sale of property under s 66G of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW). The case followed earlier orders requiring the sale of two jointly owned properties in Revesby, NSW, with the remaining issues concerning accounting between the parties and costs arising from the main proceedings and the defendant’s cross-claim, which had already been dismissed.
The Court confirmed the appointment of a real estate agent and a chartered accountant as trustees for sale, responsible for all steps necessary to effect the sale, including marketing, inspections, and completing the transactions.
A key issue was how to determine competing claims for expenditure on the properties, including improvements and contributions to joint liabilities such as rates, mortgage payments, and land tax. The parties proposed different mechanisms, including delegation to the trustees or referral to a Registrar.
Justice Richmond rejected both approaches and ordered a Court-supervised taking of accounts. Each party was required to serve detailed, verified accounts of their claimed expenditure supported by available records, with the Court overseeing the process and resolving any disputes. The Court also confirmed that oral evidence may be given where documentary support is incomplete, with cross-examination available if required. In relation to costs, the Court ordered that both parties’ costs of the s 66G application be paid from the net proceeds of sale. It rejected proposed apportionment based on the relative significance of issues, noting there was no overlap between the main proceedings and the cross-claim.
The decision provides guidance in co-ownership disputes, confirming that where parties dispute financial contributions to real property, the Court will generally supervise the accounting process to resolve competing claims.