Relationship property proceedings — commencement of relationship — occupational rent — post-separation contributions — superannuation — exceptional circumstances — unequal contributions — Property (Relationships) Act 1976, ss 2B, 2C, 2D, 8, 13, 18B & 20 — Scragg v Scott [2006] NZFLR 1076 (HC) — De Malmanche v De Malmanche [2002] 2 NZLR 838 — Martin v Martin [1979] 1 NZLR 97 (CA) — Joseph v Johansen (1993) 10 FRNZ 302 (CA) — Castle v Castle [1997] 2 NZLR 97 — Brown v Starke [2016] NZFC 7132 — Kidd v Russell [2018] NZHC 3022, (2018) 32 FRNZ 215. The parties were before the Court to determine several relationship property issues: the commencement date of their relationship; whether the relationship property should be split equally; whether there should be any occupational rent adjustment or any other post-separation adjustments; and the status of superannuation and insurance funds, and various other chattels. The parties had been married and had been in a de facto relationship prior to marriage, so this period was treated as having been part of the marriage. The Judge considered the evidence and concluded that the total period the parties had been in a qualifying relationship was four and a half years. The applicant had contributed significantly more during this period (a 67/33 percent basis) and given that the marriage was still relatively short at 4.5 years the Judge concluded it would be repugnant to justice to impose equal sharing. The Judge made orders in respect of the relationship property on the basis of the 67/33 percent split. Judgment Date: 21 April 2021.