Dahl & Hamblin

The appeal in Dahl & Hamblin was brought by the respondent, Hamblin, against a decision of the Federal Magistrates Court, which had found that the appellant, Dahl, and the respondent had been in a de facto relationship for a period of at least two years. The finding was made pursuant to section 90RD of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) and was a necessary step in the process of making orders for the alteration of property interests between the parties. The Full Court was asked to determine whether the Federal Magistrate had erred in making the declaration and, if so, whether that error was an appealable one. Additionally, the Full Court was asked to consider whether the periods during which the parties had agreed they were in a de facto relationship could be aggregated for the purpose of determining the two-year period.

The legal issues before the Full Court were twofold. Firstly, the Court was asked to determine whether the use of the word "periods" in sections 90RD(2) and 90SB(a) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) meant that where there had been a breakdown in a relationship, the periods could be aggregated so that there was only one relationship between the parties. Secondly, the Court was asked to consider whether a period of the relationship which ended prior to the commencement of Part VIIIAB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) could be included in the aggregation of the periods for the purpose of establishing the two-year period. The Full Court found that the Federal Magistrate had not erred in making the declaration and that there was no appealable error in the decision. The Court held that the use of the word "periods" in the relevant sections of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) did not mean that periods could be aggregated where there had been a breakdown in the relationship. Furthermore, the Court found that a period of the relationship which ended prior to the commencement of Part VIIIAB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) could not be included in the aggregation of the periods for the purpose of establishing the two-year period.

The appeal was dismissed, and there was no order for costs in relation to the appeal. The Full Court held that the Federal Magistrate had not erred in making the declaration that the parties had been in a de facto relationship for a period of at least two years. The Court found that the use of the word "periods" in sections 90RD(2) and 90SB(a) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) did not mean that periods could be aggregated where there had been a breakdown in the relationship. Furthermore, the Court found that a period of the relationship which ended prior to the commencement of Part VIIIAB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) could not be included in the aggregation of the periods for the purpose of establishing the two-year period. As such, the appeal was dismissed, and there was no order for costs in relation to the appeal.