Campos & Fossen - [2024] FedCFamC2F 922

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Campos & Fossen [2024] FedCFamC2F 922

File number(s): NCC 218 of 2023

Judgment of: JUDGE BETTS

Date of judgment: 16 July 2024

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – Property proceedings – seven year de facto relationship – mature aged couple – where the parties lived in the property owned by the respondent – where the parties did not acquire any joint assets or liabilities during their relationship – where the applicant seeks a cash settlement equal to 30% of the value of the net equity in the property – where the respondent seeks that the applicant’s application for a property settlement be dismissed – where the Court considers it would not be just and equitable to make an order altering the parties’ respective property interests – application dismissed – just and equitable outcome.

Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”), Part VIIIAB, ss 90SM, 90SF

Cases cited:
Cosola & Moretto [2023] FedCFamC1A 61

Kennon & Kennon (1997) FLC 92-757

Moretto & Cosola (No.2) [2022] FedCFamC1F 924

Robb & Robb (1995) FLC 92-555

Stanford & Stanford (2012) 247 CLR 108

Division: Division 2 Family Law

Number of paragraphs: 79

Date of last submission/s: 4 June 2024

Date of hearing: 3 & 4 June 2024

Place: Newcastle

Counsel for the Applicant: Ms Court

Solicitors for the Applicant: Koulouris & Associates Pty Ltd

Counsel for the Respondent: Ms Ticehurst

Solicitors for the Respondent: Nash Allen Williams & Wotton

ORDERS

NCC 218 of 2023

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:
MS CAMPOS

Applicant

AND:
MR FOSSEN

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE BETTS

DATE OF ORDER:

16 JULY 2024

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Ms Campos’ application for a property settlement order pursuant to Part VIIIAB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) is dismissed.
2.The Orders of 22 May 2024 are discharged.
3.The court will hear from the parties on the question of costs.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under a pseudonym has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
JUDGE BETTS
INTRODUCTION

Following the breakdown of a seven year childless de facto relationship between a mature-aged couple who, during their relationship neither acquired any joint assets nor incurred any joint liabilities, Ms Campos now seeks a cash…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Campos & Fossen

Details

AGLC: Campos & Fossen [2024] FedCFamC2F 922
Case: [2024] FedCFamC2F 922
Decision Date: 16 July 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, Ms Campos sought a property settlement from Mr Fossen, her former de facto partner, following the termination of their seven-year relationship. The couple, both of mature age, had cohabited in a property owned by Mr Fossen, but during their relationship, they did not acquire any joint assets or liabilities. Ms Campos sought a cash settlement representing 30% of the net equity in the property, while Mr Fossen opposed the application and sought its dismissal. The Court had to determine whether it would be just and equitable to make an order altering the parties' respective property interests under the Family Law Act 1975.

The Court considered various factors, including the length of the relationship, the contributions made by both parties, and the absence of any joint financial commitments. Judge Betts found that the circumstances did not warrant an alteration to the property interests, as Ms Campos had not made significant contributions towards the property or the relationship. The Court held that the application for a property settlement was not in line with achieving a just and equitable outcome for both parties.

As a result, Ms Campos' application for a property settlement was dismissed, and the orders previously made on 22 May 2024 were discharged. The Court also noted that it would hear from the parties regarding the question of costs. The order is subject to review to correct any minor errors or variations as permitted by the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021.

Orders

Orders of the court

NCC 218 of 2023

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MS CAMPOS

Applicant

AND:

MR FOSSEN

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE BETTS

DATE OF ORDER:

16 JULY 2024

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. Ms Campos’ application for a property settlement order pursuant to Part VIIIAB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) is dismissed.

2. The Orders of 22 May 2024 are discharged.

3. The court will hear from the parties on the question of costs.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

File number(s):	NCC 218 of 2023
Judgment of:	JUDGE BETTS
Date of judgment:	16 July 2024
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – Property proceedings – seven year de facto relationship – mature aged couple – where the parties lived in the property owned by the respondent – where the parties did not acquire any joint assets or liabilities during their relationship – where the applicant seeks a cash settlement equal to 30% of the value of the net equity in the property – where the respondent seeks that the applicant’s application for a property settlement be dismissed – where the Court considers it would not be just and equitable to make an order altering the parties’ respective property interests – application dismissed – just and equitable outcome.
Legislation:	Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”), Part VIIIAB, ss 90SM, 90SF
Cases cited:	Cosola & Moretto [2023] FedCFamC1A 61 Kennon & Kennon (1997) FLC 92-757 Moretto & Cosola (No.2) [2022] FedCFamC1F 924 Robb & Robb (1995) FLC 92-555 Stanford & Stanford (2012) 247 CLR 108
Division:	Division 2 Family Law
Number of paragraphs:	79
Date of last submission/s:	4 June 2024
Date of hearing:	3 & 4 June 2024
Place:	Newcastle
Counsel for the Applicant:	Ms Court
Solicitors for the Applicant:	Koulouris & Associates Pty Ltd
Counsel for the Respondent:	Ms Ticehurst
Solicitors for the Respondent:	Nash Allen Williams & Wotton

NCC 218 of 2023
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:	MS CAMPOS Applicant
AND:	MR FOSSEN Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	JUDGE BETTS
DATE OF ORDER:	16 JULY 2024