Fletcher v Furnance

Case

[2008] NSWSC 132

26 February 2008


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Fletcher v Furnance [2008] NSWSC 132 [2008] NSWSC 132 26 February 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in the case were Fletcher and Furnance. The dispute centred around the adjustment of property interests between the parties, particularly in relation to their contributions to the property and the Plaintiff's claim for reimbursement of a portion of her liability to Centrelink. The matter was heard in the Family Court of Australia. The legal issues the court had to decide included the extent of the Plaintiff's contributions as a homemaker, the interpretation of the relevant statute concerning property adjustments, and whether the court should consider the Plaintiff's claim for reimbursement despite her having received funds from Centrelink to which she was not entitled.

The court considered the statutory framework governing property adjustments in de facto relationships, focusing on the contributions made by the parties. It highlighted the importance of adhering to the clear wording of the statute, which looked to actual contributions made by the parties. The court found that the Plaintiff had made significant contributions as a homemaker. However, it also noted that the Plaintiff had received moneys from Centrelink that she was not entitled to. The court concluded that the ex turpi causa non oritur actio principle, which prevents a party from benefitting from their own wrongdoing, applied in this case. The court held that it would not lend its aid to a claim that was grounded in the Plaintiff's illegal conduct, as doing so would be highly offensive to public policy.

As a result, the court dismissed the Plaintiff's claim for reimbursement of one half of her liability to Centrelink. The court maintained that it would not support a claim that was based on the Plaintiff's illegal conduct, as it would contravene public policy. The court's decision underscores the importance of adhering to legal principles and the consequences of engaging in illegal activities. The final orders of the court reflected its determination to uphold the statutory framework and public policy considerations in this case.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

Legal Concepts

  • de facto relationship

  • adjustment of interests of parties in property

  • ex turpi causa non oritur actio

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document

Most Recent Citation
Tarbes v Taleb [2023] NSWSC 565

Cases Citing This Decision

14

Tarbes v Taleb [2023] NSWSC 565
Prior v Brown [2011] NSWSC 1006
Smirski v Macandar (No 2) [2011] NSWSC 373
Cases Cited

4

Statutory Material Cited

2

Beattie v Reid [2002] NSWSC 1088
Bilous v Mudaliar [2006] NSWCA 38
Bilous v Mudaliar [2006] NSWCA 38