Cizek & Mihov

The appeal in Cizek & Mihov was brought before the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, Appellate Division, to challenge a primary judge's determination that no de facto relationship existed between the appellant and the respondent. The appellant had sought property adjustment orders, asserting a de facto relationship over 12 years, while the respondent denied any such relationship. The primary judge, after a five-day hearing, concluded that the parties did not share a mutual commitment to a shared life, thus rejecting the existence of a de facto relationship.

The primary legal issue the court had to address was whether the primary judge's assessment of the parties' relationship and his conclusions on the existence of a de facto relationship were correct. The appeal court had to determine whether the primary judge erred in his approach to assessing the parties' credibility and whether he correctly applied the relevant legal principles under section 4AA(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). The appeal court found that the primary judge's approach was not flawed and that he correctly applied the governing legal principles. The court held that the primary judge's findings were consistent with the evidence presented and that there was no error in his assessment of the parties' mutual commitment to a shared life.

The appeal court dismissed the appeal and ordered the appellant to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal, which were assessed at $30,000. The court noted that the appellant had sufficient funds to pay for the appeal and did not adequately challenge the quantum of the costs. The court further noted that the amount paid by the appellant as security for costs would be retained by the respondent to satisfy the costs order. The appeal court's decision was grounded in the principle that the existence of a de facto relationship is a factual determination, and the appeal court found no grounds to overturn the primary judge's findings.