Ugly family feud over Sydney real estate business
Paula-Marie Penya claimed her father Paul promised she would end up a 'rich little girl' if she worked at Matra Real Estate without pay, and was promised both the business and their family home in Eastlakes once he retired.
The court heard how Matra Real Estate in Matraville had about 30 properties on the rent roll.
However, upon his retirement in 2018, Mr Penya ended up selling the business to Century 21 Real Estate and giving Paula-Marie $5000 from the sale.
The court action began after Mr Penya decided in 2022 that he needed more funds for his retirement and wanted to sell the Eastlakes home, which he owns with his ex-wife and Paula-Marie's mother, Theresa.
Paula-Marie lives in the home with her partner and their two young sons, alongside Theresa.
Mr Penya said he would not move to sell the house if Paula-Marie could buy him out, however, was unable to take out a loan as she was not working.
'I always relied on the promises from Dad and Mum that the business and house were going to be mine,' the court heard.
'If this was not stated to me I would have worked somewhere else to receive a wage.'
Paula-Marie claimed she worked at the business unpaid for more than 20 years and that her father told her: 'Always follow my instructions and you'll be a rich little girl.'
'Paula-Marie sought legal advice in late April 2023 after she told Paul that she could not pay him, and he told her that if she wanted the Eastlakes property she would have to sue him and Therese,' the court decision stated.
Takeover of the business
Paula-Marie told the court that she had told her father in 2018 that she would take over the business in 'a couple of years' when her two sons were in school.
'All I needed was another year or so then I would have been child-free during business hours and told Dad this over and over during 2018,' she told the court.
Mr Penya denied this and said he had 'repeatedly asked Paula-Marie to take over the business' and that she had 'consistently declined' to do so.
The court heard how Theresa wanted Paula-Marie to have the home and sent Paul a text message in April 2023, accusing him of 'hurting Paula and your grandsons for the rest of their lives'.
'Absolutely everybody is shocked at what you're doing to Paula & me! You have a few days to do the right thing,' she wrote.
'You want to leave Paula & her family & me in the street. Open your heart & mind to what God would want you to do.'
On Wednesday, Justice Kate Williams dismissed Paula-Marie's estoppel claim, finding she had failed to establish that a 'clear and unequivocal promise' was made that she would be given the property and business after her father's retirement.
Justice Williams said the evidence pointed towards Paula-Marie being promised the business and home 'by way of inheritance' after her parents' deaths.
'[The evidence] provides no support for Paula-Marie's claim to have been promised that she would be given the business or the Eastlakes property during Paul's and Therese's lifetime in return for her working in the business without a wage,' Justice Williams said in her decision.
Justice Williams also pointed out that Paula-Marie and her partner were able to buy multiple investment properties over the last two decades because they were living 'rent-free' at the Eastlakes home.
Mr Penya's application to sell the house was granted, meaning the family will now be forced to move out of the Eastlakes home.
Mr Penya changes his original will
The court heard how, due to the proceedings, Mr Penya had revoked his will giving everything to his daughter, and is now instead leaving his estate to his long-term partner Irene.
'I just got sick of it. It was all take, take, take,' Mr Penya told the court.
'When they need money, when I had money they could get it, but when I was out, no money, now I was the bad one. I made them millionaires; they were useless.'
Justice Williams dismissed the estoppel claim and granted Mr Penya's application for the home to be sold.
Paula-Marie's family and Therese were ordered to vacate the home no later than seven days before the sale date.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
34 minutes ago
- ABC News
NSW Labor government unsuccesful in condemnation of independent MP Mark Latham
Mark Latham has escaped parliamentary condemnation after the former federal Labor leader was accused of sharing secret government information. The NSW Labor Party put forward a condemnation motion against Mr Latham after accusing him of "disclosing authorised information" under parliamentary privilege about a fellow MP. But the motion was adjourned after being blocked by the opposition until October 13. The condemnation was defeated 22 to 16 after a fiery debate. It is alleged Mr Latham referenced confidential information from a psychologist's report prepared for the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) in proceedings brought by independent MP Alex Greenwich, a claim Mr Latham denied. On Tuesday night, he told the chamber that the remarks were based on publicly available information, including several affidavits signed by Mr Greenwich. "This is not a state secret," he said of the information. He said when he viewed the information, it was only under a non-publication order, not formally under parliamentary privilege. During the debate, Mr Latham went on to further criticise Mr Greenwich and journalists present at the NCAT hearing. He said if he had the chance, he would share the information again. Penny Sharpe, leader of the government in the upper house, moved the motion to condemn the independent MP. Ms Sharpe said that revealing deeply personal medical records about a fellow member meant the house should take a stand over Mr Latham's use of parliamentary privilege. "If you don't draw this line, I don't know what line you are going to draw," Ms Sharpe said, calling on her parliamentary colleagues to support the condemnation. However, Mr Latham again insisted he had not broken standing orders in parliament. Despite the failure of the condemnation motion, Mr Latham was later successfully referred to the Privileges Committee over the alleged sharing of information in a privileged report by the NSW Police Force in a separate incident. On the prospects of a parliamentary committee investigation into his actions on that matter, which relates to former police commissioner Karen Webb, Mr Latham said: "Bring it on." "I'm happy for these things to go to privilege … I wouldn't mind if this matter went to the High Court," Mr Latham said. Last month, it was revealed Mr Latham's former partner, Nathalie Matthews, had sought an apprehended violence order against him in a NSW court, with media reports that she accused him of a "sustained pattern" of abuse and pressuring her into "degrading" sex acts. The independent MP has vowed to defend himself in court, and labelled Ms Matthews's claims as "comically false and ridiculous". Police are not investigating the matter. In the wake of the application being made public, it also emerged that Mr Latham had sent disparaging photos and comments about some female MPs to Ms Matthews, which he said was part of an "in-joke" taken out of context. He has apologised to the MPs at the centre of the photos, describing them as "ill-advised". Mr Latham released a lengthy public statement last month, addressing allegations of inappropriate behaviour in state parliament.
ABC News
34 minutes ago
- ABC News
Productivity Commission says government must pause plan for 'mandatory guardrails' on AI
The Productivity Commission has opposed the introduction of tough laws to control AI being considered by the government, warning its plan for "mandatory guardrails" should be paused until gaps in the law are properly identified. The government has been working on a comprehensive response to the rapid rise of artificial intelligence tools, with one option being a dedicated AI Act that would set rules for all AI technologies based on their risk to society, including possible bans on the most risky technologies. AI will be one of the central issues debated at the government's upcoming productivity round table late this month. Ahead of that, the commission has cautioned against a heavy-handed approach from government, though it agreed gaps in existing law "exposed by AI" should be closed as soon as possible. Its warning comes just two days after former industry minister Ed Husic, who began the government's years-long review into AI laws, publicly backed the creation of a dedicated Artificial Intelligence Act. It also puts the commission at odds with unions, who have toughened their stance on AI ahead of this month's productivity roundtable, saying not only is an AI Act needed, but protections from job losses to AI should also be on the agenda. In a report released ahead of that round table, the commission conservatively estimated AI could add more than $116 billion to Australia's economy over the next decade, or $4,400 per capita, driving a boost to productivity as large or even larger than the internet and mobile phones did 20 years ago. But it warned that such a boost would be at risk if regulation was introduced as anything other than a last resort. "Adding economy-wide regulations that specifically target AI could see Australia fall behind the curve, limiting a potentially enormous growth opportunity," commissioner Stephen King wrote. "The Australian government should only apply the proposed 'mandatory guardrails for high-risk AI' in circumstances that lead to harms that cannot be mitigated by existing regulatory frameworks and where new technology-neutral regulation is not possible." To give a sense of scale, the 20-year average for labour productivity growth is sitting at about 0.9 per cent a year, and the Productivity Commission expects AI alone could add about 4.3 per cent to labour productivity growth over the next decade. The past few years of inflation and cost-of-living pain have proven why it matters: growing the economy means wages and living standards can grow too, or fall backward if the economy stagnates. It is the kind of growth Treasurer Jim Chalmers has described as potentially "the most transformative technology in human history", which is why it has become such a focus of the coming round table. However, the Productivity Commission said there was considerable uncertainty around how big AI would prove to be, saying at the lower end it could provide just a tiny 0.05 per cent annual boost, or it could cause a 1.3 percentage point annual lift — an almost unimaginable explosion in growth. The commission also acknowledged that opportunity would not arrive without "painful transitions" for workers made redundant as sectors reshape around AI. It said that while the picture was uncertain, the World Economic Forum expected nine million jobs could be displaced globally, and the Australian government may have to consider support for workers to be retrained. Responding to the Productivity Commission's report, Mr Chalmers said the government could ensure AI was a force for good by treating it as "an enabler, not an enemy". "We're optimistic about the role AI can play in strengthening our economy and lifting living standards for more Australians at the same time as we're realistic about the risks," Mr Chalmers said. "AI will be a key concern of the economic reform round table I'm convening this month because it has major implications for economic resilience, productivity, and budget sustainability." The AI industry has yet to win the public's trust. Repeated surveys have found skepticism among the public, most of whom say they fear AI will do more harm than good. The sector and the government know the public must be brought along for the potential of AI to be realised, and for Australia to keep pace with the world as it changes. But investors have warned the Productivity Commission that delays in a comprehensive response from the government to AI are leading to a "wait-and-see" approach. The federal government has said little about its AI response since former minister Ed Husic told reporters in January the government was in "the final stages" of developing mandatory guardrails. The treasurer wrote on Sunday that the government intended to regulate "as much as necessary" to protect Australians, "but as little as possible" to encourage the industry. "It is not beyond us to chart a responsible middle course on AI, which maximises the benefits and manages the risks," he wrote.
The Australian
34 minutes ago
- The Australian
Tech giants could gain access to Aussie content under new proposal
Big tech companies would gain access to a vast library of copyrighted Australian content to further fuel their AI capabilities under recommendations put forward by the Productivity Commission, with the controversial scenario likely to leave the nation's news media outlets and creative professionals without compensation for their work. In an interim report on 'unlocking the benefits of AI and data to spark growth', released on Tuesday night, the commission called for feedback on what reforms were needed to bring the copyright regime up to date, amid its concerns that the laws were outdated and ill-equipped to deal with the rise of artificial intelligence technology. Possible overhaul of the laws is expected to prompt a fierce backlash from industry leaders, many of whom have previously aired concerns that big tech routinely sourced content it did not own as a means to further its products, without compensating the owners of the copyright. In a submission to the report, arts advisory body Creative Australia expressed concern about the unauthorised use of copyrighted materials to train AI models. 'Much of the data has been used reportedly without consent from the original creator, and without acknowledgment or remuneration,' the submission says. 'The global nature of the technology industry has made it difficult for the owners of creative work to enforce their intellectual property rights and be remunerated for the use of their work.' Last week, KPMG chairman Martin Sheppard and chief executive Andrew Yates warned the Albanese government that distrust of AI was 'not without basis'. Two days later, the Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance called for greater government intervention on AI, with a new survey revealing high level of concern in the media, creative, and entertainment sectors regarding the technology. As part of the wider recommendations in the interim report, the commission finds that while the full effects of AI on productivity are still uncertain, AI 'will likely add more than $116bn to Australian economic activity over the next decade'. 'It recommends an approach to regulation that limits the risks that AI presents without stifling its growth potential,' it says. In a recommendation set to anger the news media and creative industries, the report's summary reads: 'The government should check for gaps in current regulation exposed by AI and, where possible, amend that same regulation to fill them. AI-specific regulation should only be considered as a last resort.' The report recommends exploration of 'whether current Australian copyright law is a barrier to building and training AI models'. The report acknowledges that 'copyright violation is an example of a harm that AI could exacerbate by changing economic incentives', but suggests tweaks to the laws that would grant exemptions – under the guise of 'research or study' – to big tech companies wanting to improve the data libraries of their AI models. 'There are concerns that the Australian copyright regime is not keeping pace with the rise of AI technology – whether because it does not adequately facilitate the use of copyrighted works or because AI developers can too easily sidestep existing licensing and enforcement mechanisms,' the report says. One of the policy options suggested is to amend the Copyright Act to include a fair-dealing exception that would cover 'text and data mining' – a move that would potentially grant technology companies wider access to the works and content produced by Australian journalists, artists, authors, and musicians, to name a few. AI specific regulation is rare globally, although last week the developers of leading AI models such as OpenAI, Google and Microsoft agreed to abide by rules on transparency, copyright and safety across Europe. The commission flags several options, including: 'no policy change', under which copyright owners would continue to enforce their rights under the existing framework, including through the courts; introducing measures to facilitate licensing of copyrighted materials, such as through collecting societies; or amendments to the Copyright Act to include the fair dealing exception. While text and data mining – methods that use automation to analyse large volumes of text and data to identify patterns – is considered 'fair use' in relation to copyright use in some overseas jurisdictions, it is seen as a flawed model that can leave legitimate copyright holders short-changed. 'It should also be noted that a TDM exception would not be a 'blank cheque' for all copyrighted materials to be used as inputs into all AI models,' the commission says. 'The use must also be considered 'fair' …' The commission warns against introduction of too many onerous legislative requirements on big tech's AI advancements. 'It is the PC's view that the copyright issues posed by AI can also similarly be resolved through adapting existing copyright law frameworks rather than introducing AI-specific regulation,' it says. James Madden has worked for The Australian for over 20 years. As a reporter, he covered courts, crime and politics in Sydney and Melbourne. James was previously Sydney chief of staff, deputy national chief of staff and national chief of staff, and was appointed media editor in 2021. Economics New regulation risks $116bn in economic gains at risk, Productivity Commission warns Jim Chalmers. Politics Treasurer's marathon consultation with Australia's business elite faces being relegated to a talkfest as government backs away from major economic reforms.
