In the 2019 case of Jabour v Jabour, the husband acquired a part interest in two blocks of land prior to marrying the wife. At the time of the trial the rezoned land was valued at $10,350,000 and constituted the majority of the value of the asset pool. The trial judge ordered that the husband receive 66% of the non-superannuation assets and the wife 34% taking into account the husband’s initial financial contributions.
A partial property settlement is a distribution of assets or financial resources between separated parties in advance of final orders. The Court tends to be reluctant to make a partial property settlement because it takes place prior to evidence being tested before the Court.
There can be a lot of uncertainty around whether a couple is in a de facto relationship. A person is in a de facto relationship with another person (irrespective of gender) if they have a relationship with that person as a couple living together on a genuine domestic basis, having regard to all the circumstances of their relationship.
In determining if leave is to be granted to permit a party to commence property proceedings out of time, the court must be satisfied that hardship would be caused to a party or child of the relationship, if leave was not granted.
Just last Wednesday the High Court handed down a landmark decision confirming the legal parentage of a sperm donor. Robert Masson donated sperm to his friend Susan Parsons in 2006, leading to the conception of now twelve-year-old “B”. Robert is listed on B’s birth certificate as her parent. B calls Robert “Daddy”.
This year the High Court will hear a landmark case on the legal parentage of a child born via sperm donation.
In the 2018 case of Goldman v Goldman, the wife was the primary carer to the parties’ two children aged 13 and 11 years of age respectively at the date of the trial prior to separation, and the children had also lived with the wife since separation.
With the new year upon us, many new enquiries relate to parenting orders and whether these can be changed. Thankfully in the recent case of Searson & Searson [2017] FamCAFC 119 (5 July 2017) the Full Court (Murphy, Kent and Loughnan JJ) reviewed the current case law with respect to this.
The Full Court of the Family Court held in the 2017 decision of Re Kelvin that the Court’s sanction is no longer required for stage two treatment of Gender Dysphoria where the child is capable of giving Informed Consent or those with parental authority authorise the treatment.
Life, financially or otherwise, does not go into a state of animated suspension after separation and pending property settlement – parties’ financial circumstances constantly change and will be different at time of separation and when orders are made.