Insights

In this Family Court Judgment, Williams J determined Australia was the clearly inappropriate jurisdiction to determine financial and divorce proceedings between the parties.

Relationships in the modern world Fairbairn v Radecki (2022) FLC 94-083; [2022] HCA 18. In this recent High Court decision, the Trustee and Guardian for the de facto wife sought special leave to appeal against orders made by the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia.

As our society slowly eases back into some form of normality, while still in the midst of the COVID 19 pandemic, the issue of vaccinations is one that many people grapple with.

This Full Court judgement concerns a husband's appeal against enforcement orders.

This judgement concerned a father's application to the Court for his eleven year old child to live with him. The child had lived with the mother her entire life and had only spent supervised time with her father, which the mother had delayed and obstructed. At the time of trial, the child had not had any contact with the father for 3 years.

In this recent Full Court Decision, the husband appealed against Orders that allowed the wife to make an application for financial settlement, despite it being 10 years after their divorce - and, therefore, out of time.

As we know, binding child support agreements give parties the opportunity to enter into a written agreement about how they will each financially support their children going forward.

The Wife was not proficient in English at the time the Financial Agreement was drafted, despite this the Financial Agreement was written in English. The Wife only discussed the agreement with her solicitor for 30 minutes. The agreement was signed in 2011.

This judgment concerned a Father's contravention application in relation to a parenting order made in 2018, providing for a 3 year old to spend 4 days per month with the Father.

In this Family Court Judgment, the Judge considered the Mother's Initiating Application seeking urgent interim parenting Orders to be obtained ex parte the Father.

The trial judge ordered that the parties' property be divided 78/22% in favour of the Husband.

In this Full Court decision, the Wife was appealing against a decision of a Judge in the Family Court of Western Australia, who had made orders providing for a 25% adjustment to the Husband, based on his contribution of a property.

Breach of parenting orders found but no sanction imposed, and costs ordered against father as his application was "petty and unwarranted". A case update by Helen Mulvaney

The Full Court finds parties contributions equal in circumstances where husband's parent's transferred the parties a 60 acre property. A case summary by Helen Mulvaney

The Federal Circuit Court case of Blevins has struck fear in the hearts of many, and highlights a party's ability to bring an application for spousal maintenance well after separation. In Blevins, the application was made 23 years after the parties separated and 20 years after they had a final property settlement.

Walpole & Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice [2020] was heard in the Family Court of Australia in Sydney. The case dealt with the mother's appeal of an order compelling her to return the children of the relationship to New Zealand.

The case of Cabadas [2019] was an appeal heard in the Family Court of Australia. The court held that the appellant husband, who used the livestock as part of his stock-in-trade in the regular maintenance of the business, was not required to add its value back to the asset pool.

Jabour was an appeal from property settlement orders made in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, the effect of which was to divide the net asset pool of the parties worth $9,033,912 (34% to the wife and 66% to the husband).

On 19 June 2019 the High Court of Australia delivered judgment in the case of Masson v Parsons. The decision finally determined that the Appellant "Robert", who had provided sperm to a friend, "Susan", so she could conceive a child, was a "parent" of that child.

On 19 June 2019, the Victorian Voluntary Assisted Dying Act 2017 ("VAD") will commence. Victoria will become the first jurisdiction in Australia giving people a right to die, with eligibility subject to strict criteria.

Almost all matters discussed during marriage or relationship counselling cannot be used in evidence in family law proceedings. This extends to what is said or discussed to a mediator or psychologist during the course of mediation or Family Dispute Resolution. Sections 10E and 10J of the Family Law Act 1975 provides that such evidence inadmissible.

At Clancy & Triado our accredited family lawyers are experts in the law surrounding surrogacy. We work with integrity and empathy, alongside relevant experts including medical specialists and lawyers to smooth the journey for our clients.

Have you ever wondered what would happen if you became seriously unwell or injured and unable to make decisions about your medical treatment? While it's not something anyone wants to dwell on, putting a little thought and planning into these matters can mean - should the unthinkable happen - you are cared for in keeping with your beliefs, values and wishes.

While many of us use the phrase "de facto relationship" in conversation when describing our friends or peers, when asked what this phrase means in the family law setting, the answer is not as simple as you think. A recent case in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia at Melbourne considered this very issue and the steps required pursuant to the Family Law Act (Commonwealth) 1975 ("the Act") to establish the existence of a de facto relationship.

Alicia is an intellectually disabled child whose future would be complicated by unique health issues. Her family had been advised of a 'special medical procedure' that would make a significant difference to her health and well-being as she moved into adulthood

Family law, and specifically the Family Court, often gets a bad press for justice. But a recent Clancy Triado case demonstrates how legal knowledge and applied common sense resolved an issue before it became a complication.

Maria had been living in a same-sex violent relationship and had one child with her abusive partner. Although she had wanted to leave the relationship for many years, she was paralysed by concerns about the possible consequences for leaving - both for herself and for her child.

Luigi passed away peacefully at the age of 95. Despite gradually declining mental health, he had happily lived on his own since the death of his wife in 2012.

Anton* came to Clancy & Triado for urgent advice and action. His former partner had abducted his seven-year old son and fled the country in an effort to hurt Anton in the most profound way possible.

In May this year, the High Court of Australia handed down the judgement in the case of Badenach v Calvert [2016] HCA18. The case highlights the difference between 'Will-Making', and 'Estate Planning'.

Whether or not a Will is proved or an Estate passes under the laws of intestacy, dependents such as spouses and children may challenge the distribution of the Estate on the basis of 'inadequate provision' being made for them. This area of law is often referred to as Testator Family Maintenance law.

The highly publicised detention of Brisbane mother Sally Faulkner and the four members of Channel Nine's flagship current affairs program 60 Minutes in Beirut, Lebanon, has highlighted the risks and consequences of overseas travel amid child custody disputes in countries where The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction ("The Convention") is not in force.

A married man had a secret 17 year extra marital relationship, which according to the alleged de facto wife, constituted a de facto relationship, as she said she and the man enjoyed time together at various times in various places, had a sexual relationship, and expressed love and affection for each other.