Legal Research
Cases
Hayes v Marquis

Hayes v Marquis

Case [2008] NSWCA 10 21 February 2008

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

New South Wales

Court of Appeal

CITATION: Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10
This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.

HEARING DATE(S): 16 May 2007

JUDGMENT DATE:
22 February 2008

JUDGMENT OF: Beazley JA at 1; McColl JA at 19; Einstein J at 151

DECISION: 1 Appeal allowed. 2. Set aside the verdict in favour of the respondent in the sum of $120,000. 3. Order that there be judgment for the respondent in the sum of $100,000. 4. Order that each party pay his and her own costs of the appeal.

CATCHWORDS: FAMILY LAW AND CHILD WELFARE – Property (Relationships) Act 1984 – s 5(1)(b) – whether parties in a "close personal relationship" where not living continuously in the same house – whether "personal care" in s 5(1)(b) includes emotional support – relevance to determination of relationship of non-disclosure of cohabitation to government authorities – adjustment of property interests – failure to take into account part of appellant’s assets – obligation of parties to property relationship proceedings to make full and frank disclosure of relevant financial circumstances.

LEGISLATION CITED: Civil Procedure Act 2005
De Facto Relationships Act 1984
Family Provision Act 1982
Property (Relationships) Act 1984
Property (Relationships) Legislation Amendment Act 1999
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005

CATEGORY: Principal judgment

CASES CITED: Armory v Delamirie (1722) 1 Stra 505; (1722) 93 ER 664
Bar-Mordecai v Hillston [2004] NSWCA 65
Barnes v De Jesus [2001] NSWSC 19
Bilous v Mudaliar [2006] NSWCA 38
Black v Black (1991) 15 Fam LR 109
Burden v Cottee (Supreme Court of New South Wales, Bryson J, 31 July 1998, unreported)
Chanter v Catts [2005] NSWCA 411; (2005) 64 NSWLR 360
Davey v Lee (1990) 13 Fam LR 688
Dridi v Fillmore [2001] NSWSC 319
Dunstan v Rickwood (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 266
Elite Protective Personnel Pty Ltd v Salmon (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 373
Fung v Ye [2007] NSWCA 115
Government Insurance Office of New South Wales v Rozniak (1992) 27 NSWLR 665
Greenwood v Merkel [2004] NSWSC 43
House v R [1936] HCA 40; (1936) 55 CLR 499
Howlett v Neilson [2005] NSWCA 149
Hughes v Egger [2005] NSWSC 18
James v Surf Road Nominees Pty Ltd (No 2) [2005] NSWCA 296
John Fairfax & Sons Ltd v Carson (1991) 24 NSWLR 259
Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (1959) 101 CLR 298
Jones v Grech [2001] NSWCA 208; (2001) 27 Fam LR 711
Kardos v Sarbutt [2006] NSWCA 11
Kardos v Sarbutt (No 2) [2006] NSWCA 206
Mcdonald v Stelzer [2000] NSWCA 302; (2001) 27 Fam LR 304
Manns v Kennedy [2007] NSWCA 217
Metropolitan Water Sewerage & Drainage Board v Histon [1982] 2 NSWLR 720
O’Brien v Tanning Research Laboratories Inc (1988) 14 NSWLR 601
Paino v Paino [2006] NSWSC 218
Petersen v Gregory [2007] NSWSC 8
PY v CY [2005] QCA 247
Re Fagan Deceased [1980] 5 Fam LR 813
Roy v Sturgeon (1986)

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 Hayes v Marquis

Details

AGLC: Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10
Case: [2008] NSWCA 10
Decision Date: 21 February 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Hayes v Marquis*, the New South Wales Court of Appeal considered a dispute concerning the adjustment of property interests between the parties, who were in a de facto relationship. The central issue was whether the parties qualified as being in a "close personal relationship" under the *Property (Relationships) Act 1984* (NSW), particularly given that they did not live continuously in the same house.

The court was required to determine whether the definition of "personal care" within section 5(1)(b) of the Act encompassed emotional support, and how the non-disclosure of their cohabitation to government authorities was relevant to the determination of their property relationship. Furthermore, the court had to consider whether the original decision had failed to take into account a portion of the appellant's assets when adjusting the property interests.

The Court of Appeal found that the parties did indeed constitute a de facto relationship under the Act, and that "personal care" extended beyond physical assistance to include emotional support. The court also held that the failure of the parties to make full and frank disclosure of their financial circumstances, including their cohabitation, was a significant factor. The court allowed the appeal, setting aside the original verdict of $120,000 in favour of the respondent and ordering judgment for the respondent in the sum of $100,000. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs of the appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

1 Appeal allowed. 2. Set aside the verdict in favour of the respondent in the sum of $120,000. 3. Order that there be judgment for the respondent in the sum of $100,000. 4. Order that each party pay his and her own costs of the appeal.

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.

Citations

132

AGLC Citation

Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10

Most Recent Citation

M v P [2008] SADC 169

Cases citing this decision · 50 of 95 shown

Halsell & Halsell
[2024] FedCFamC2F 1288 Para 14

…he nature of the relationship, but they are not determinative. They are taken into account as part of all the circumstances.[8] [8] Heyes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 at [99]; citing Bar-Mordecai v Hillston [2004] NSWCA 65 at [118]; cited with approval in Sinclair & Whittaker [2013] FamCAFC 129 at [66].…
Van Rensburg v Adilinis; Van Rensburg v Raft
[2024] NSWSC 1146 Para 335

…Reliance was placed on Skarica v Toska [2014] NSWSC 34 ( Skarica v Toska ) at [42] per Lindsay J and Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 ( Hayes v Marquis ) at [76]-[79] per McColl JA as cited in Sadiq v NSW Trustee and Guardian [2015] NSWSC 716 ( Sadiq v NSW Trustee and Guardian ) at [247].…
Le v Angius; Angius v Angius
[2024] NSWSC 924 Para 93

…Barrett J’s observation regarding the central concept of a de facto relationship was endorsed by McColl JA (Beazley JA agreeing) in Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 at [83].…
The Estate of Daniele Claudio Legler
[2024] NSWSC 726

…v Cheung & Ors (2021) 150 ACSR 461 Forsyth v Sinclair [2010] VSCA 147 Fremlin v Fremlin (1913) 16 CLR 212 Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 Howland v Ellis [2001] NSWCA 456 Jonah v White (2011) 258 FLR 236; [2011] FamCA 221 Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298 NSW Trustee and Guardian v McGrath [2013] NSWSC 1894 O’Donn…
Cizek & Mihov
[2024] FedCFamC2F 584 Para 44

…5] Sinclair & Whittaker [2013] FamCAFC 129 where at [66] the Full Court cited with approval the comments of McColl J at [99] in Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10.…
Lingard v Commonwealth Bank Officers Superannuation Corporation Pty Limited
[2024] FCA 174 Para 28

…A, 4 August 1992, unrep) at 4–5; Bar-Mordecai v Hillston [2004] NSWCA 65] at [86], [125] (Mason P, Tobias JA and Davies AJA); Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 at [73]–[74] (McColl JA, Beazley JA agreeing). In reaching the conclusion about the existence of the relationship, the court must also be aware of the concep…
Frank v Angell
[2024] NSWSC 158 Para 107

…In Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10, McColl JA (Beazley JA agreeing) observed at [84]:…
McGuire bht McGuire v New South Wales Trustee and Guardian
[2023] NSWSC 1013 Para 25

…The notion of “personal care” is not confined to matters of physicality, and may extend to emotional support: Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 at [87] (McColl JA, with whom Beazley JA agreed).…
Sheen v Hesan
[2023] NSWSC 468

…Askew v Askew [2015] NSWSC 192 Ballam v Ferro [2022] NSWSC 1200 Bar-Mordecai v Hillston [2004] NSWCA 65 Bartlett v Coomber [2008] NSWCA 100 Bkassini v Sarkis [2017] NSWSC 1487 Blendell v Blendell; Blendell v Blendell [2020] NSWCA 154 Blendell v Byrne; Estate of Noeline Joan Blendell [2019] NSWSC 583 Boettcher v D…
Weisbord v Rodny (No 4)
[2022] NSWSC 1726

…988] NSWCA 23 Graham v Graham [2011] NSWSC 504 Haertsch v Whiteway (2020) 102 NSWLR 386; [2020] NSWCA 133 Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 Limberger v Limberger; Oakman v Limberger [2021] NSWSC 474 Madden-Smith v Madden (Estate of late Doris Linda Madden) [2012] NSWSC 146 McDonald v O’Connor [2019] NSWSC 261 Megerd…
Travers & Debski
[2022] FedCFamC1F 748 Para 16

…ir & Whittaker (2013) FLC 93-551 where, at [66], the Full Court quoted, with apparent approval, the comments of McColl J in Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 at [99].…
Pollock v NSW Trustee & Guardian
[2022] NSWSC 923 Para 424

…Light v Anderson [1992] NSWCA 136 at 4 (Handley JA, Kirby P and Priestley JA agreeing); Bar-Mordecai v Hillston , at [86], [125]; Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 at [73]-[74] (McColl JA, Beazley JA and Einstein J agreeing). It is the composite picture that must be looked at and individual factors should not be iso…
McAllister & McAllister
[2022] FedCFamC2F 901 Para 27

…t necessary that the parties maintain a single residence together and nor does it require the parties to live together full time (see Hayes & Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10). That would also seem obvious having regard to the provisions of section 4AA (5)(b) of the Act which contemplates the possibility of a de facto rela…
Barry v Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages
[2022] NSWCATAD 203 Para 45

…factor to be considered. Living together full-time is not required to meet the definition of “living together as a couple”; Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10; White v Williams [2019] NSWSC 437 at [97], NSW Trustee and Guardian v McGrath & Ors [2013] NSWSC 1894 at [13]. There is also no requirement of uninterrupted c…
Daley v Donaldson
[2022] NSWCA 96

…0 (2005) 63 NSWLR 594; [2005] NSWSC 916 Australia Estates Pty Ltd v Cairns City Council [2005] QCA 328 Bartlett v Coomber [2008] NSWCA 10 Blendell v Blendell; Blendell v Blendell [2020] NSWCA 154 Federated Engine-Drivers and Firemen’s Association of Australasia v Broken Hill Pty Co Ltd (1911) 12 CLR 398; [1911] HC…
Shelby & Rylan
[2022] FedCFamC1F 281 Para 3

…Whittaker (2013) FLC 93-551 where, at [66], the Full Court quoted, with apparent approval, the comments of McColl J at [99] of Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10. What happened between April 2004 and about mid-2007?…
Khadarou v Antarakis
[2021] NSWSC 743 Para 45

…rsons can be seen to regard the place or places in question as his or her home and to be doing so on a rational basis. [2] 2. See Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 at [166].…
Yesilhat v Calokerinos
[2021] NSWCA 110

…[2007] 2 Qd R 138; [2006] QCA 555 Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118; [2003] HCA 22 Hayes v Marquis [2008] DFC ¶95-415; [2008] NSWCA 10 Heydon v The Perpetual Executors, Trustees and Agency Company (W.A.) Limited (1930) 45 CLR 111; [1930] HCA 26 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 Jonah & White (2011) 25…
Bailey v Palombo
[2020] NSWSC 1209

…[2006] QCA 555 Forster v Jododex Australia Pty Limited (1972) 127 CLR 421; [1972] HCA 61 Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 In re Blériot Manufacturing Aircraft Company (Limited) (1916) 32 TLR 253 In the Goods of William Loveday [1900] P 154 In the Marriage of Rolfe (1977) 25 ALR 217; (1979) ¶FLC 90-629 In the matte…
Indjic v Stojanovic
[2020] NSWSC 470

…997] 2 VR 359 Hamod v New South Wales [2011] NSWCA 375 Harkness v Harkness (No 2) [2012] NSWSC 35 Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 Howard v Batistich [2019] FCA 525 HRDW v HSJL [2006] FamCA 257 Hughes v St Barbara Mines Ltd (No 4) [2010] WASC 160 In the matter of Kit Digital Australia Pty Ltd (in liq) [2014] NSWSC…
Estate of the late Shirley Joan Violet Gardner; Bernengo v Leaney
[2019] NSWSC 1324 Para 19

…sected into discrete elements, each of which must be satisfied, but instead is to be approached as a comprehensive notion or concept: Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 at [73] ( Hayes ); Bar-Mordecai v Hillston [2004] NSWCA 65 at [86] and [125] ( Bar-Mordecai ).…
Sanil and Lennon
[2019] FamCA 556 Para 5

…In Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10, McColl JA suggested that in undertaking the task of determining whether the parties are in a de facto relationship it is “necessary to consider the evidence as a whole, not under isolated headings.” I respectfully agree with that approach which is consistent with the decision of…
XUN & LARUE
[2019] FCCA 1181 Para 13

…at such statements are made to lenders or government authorities does not elevate them to a higher status. In Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10, McColl JA said at [99]: Statements to a government authority apparently inconsistent with a party's case may complicate the resolution of the issue of the nature of the rel…
S, CM v M, Ss
[2019] SASCFC 20 Para 25

…i) “as may be relevant” to the case. The evidence is to be considered as a whole and not under isolated discrete headings.[3] [3] Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 at [73] per McColl JA citing Barnes v De Jesus [2001] NSWSC 19 at [26] per Windeyer J.…
Hoffmann and Braddock
[2019] FCCA 144 Para 15

…ore has to be approached by considering the expression as a whole and not in several parts”. 49. In Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10, McColl JA held that the effect of earlier decisions of the New South Wales courts, including the Court of Appeal, meant that “practically, [it is] … necessary to consider the evidenc…
YING & LANG
[2018] FamCA 784

…terminative. The fact that such statements are made to lenders or government authorities does not elevate them to a higher status. In Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 McColl JA said a [99]: Statements to a government authority apparently inconsistent with any party’s case may complicate the resolution of the issue…
Grohl and Acland
[2018] FamCA 732 Para 7

…ationship, but they are not determinative. They are taken into account as part of all the circumstances ... (Reference omitted) [9] Ibid [66]. [10] [2008] NSWCA 10 [99].…
LEONIDAS & WENHAM
[2018] FamCA 514 Para 6

…are taken into account as part of all the circumstances ... (Reference omitted) [6] Sinclair &Whittaker (supra), [65]. [7] Ibid. [8] Ibid,[66]. [9] [2008] NSWCA 10,[99].…
Capleman and Capleman
[2018] FamCA 457 Para 5

…d: 66. The fact that such statements are made to lenders or government authorities does not elevate them to a higher status. In Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 McColl JA said at [99]: Statements to a government authority apparently inconsistent with a party’s case may complicate the resolution of the issue of the…
Bezjak v Wyatt
[2018] NSWSC 199 Para 62

…al Trustee Co Ltd (1987) 21 NSWLR 677, at 685; Light v Anderson [1992] NSWCA 136, at 4; Bar-Mordecai v Hillston , at [86], [125]; Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 , at [73]-[74]. It is the composite picture that must be looked at and individual factors should not be isolated and attributed relative degrees of impor…
Huxtable v Hawkins
[2018] NSWSC 174 Para 45

…he significance of a common residence, in determining whether a de facto relationship exists, depends on its nature and extent” ( Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 at [78]), the defendant emphasised the following extract from the judgment of Hallen AsJ in Thompson v Public Trustee of NSW [2010] NSWSC 1137 at [82]:…
Na v Tiu (No 2)
[2017] FamCAFC 269 Para 5

…d. The characterisation of the parties’ relationship must be determined objectively rather than subjectively (see Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 at [1], [70]), so their individual beliefs, regardless of how earnestly they held them, were of little moment. Nevertheless, the fervour of their perceptions was liable…
Weldon and Levitt
[2017] FCCA 3072 Para 2

…inative. 66. The fact that such statements are made to lenders or government authorities does not elevate them to a higher status. In Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 McColl JA said at [99]: Statements to a government authority apparently inconsistent with a party’s case may complicate the resolution of the issue o…
VAN & NORD
[2017] FCCA 2727

…2005] QSC 253 Zau v Uongh [2013] FamCA 347 Vaughan & Bele [2011] FamCA 436 Tang & Vo [2016] FCCA 880 Roy v Sturgeon [1986] DFC 95-031 Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 Barnes v de Jesus [2001] NSWSC 19 Re Fagan deceased [1980] 5 FamLR 813 Vaughan v Hoskovich [2010] NSWSC 706 PY v CY [2005] QCA 247 KQ v HAE [2006] QC…
Elias George Wakim v Karime Wakim
[2017] NSWSC 1283 Para 74

…McColl JA (with whom in this respect Beazley JA agreed) summarised the principles relevant to the evaluative task under section 20 in Hayes v Marquis (2008) NSWCA 10 at [106]-[108]:…
Calokerinos, Executor of the Estate of the late George Sclavos v Yesilhat; Yesilhat v Calokerinos, Executor of the Estate of the late George Sclavos
[2017] NSWSC 666

…ness [2011] NSWSC 1421 Hatsatouris v Hatsatouris [2001] NSWCA 408 Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 Heperu Pty Limited v Belle (2009) 76 NSWLR 230 Heydon v The Perpetual Executors Trustee and Agency Company (W.A.) Ltd (1930) 45 CLR 111 In re Hodgson (1885) 31 ChD 177 In the Estate of Masters (deceased); Hill v Plumm…
Jasarevic v Nesovanovic
[2017] VSC 267

…[164][2008] NSWCA 10, [166].…
Estate MPS, deceased
[2017] NSWSC 482 Para 27

…the reality of domestic life in this respect, constrained not by a requirement that people live together “as a couple” ( Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 at [75]-[76]), but by a relationship that is close, personal and attended by provision by one or each of them to the other with domestic support and personal car…
NA & TIU
[2017] FamCA 282 Para 5

…iend and girlfriend. The characterisation of the parties’ relationship must be determined objectively rather than subjectively (see Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 at [1], [70]), so their individual beliefs, regardless of how earnestly they held them, were of little moment. Nevertheless, the fervour of their perce…
BENNETT & CRICK
[2017] FCCA 329 Para 2

…In Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10, Einstein J discussed the notion of living together in the context of a de facto relationship property dispute (at [166]): “[166] Upon its proper construction the expression ‘living together’ in the context of the instant legislation is to be understood as referring to the sharin…
ABROON & TALIZ
[2016] FamCA 1031 Para 2

…parties lived in a de facto relationship is a question of fact to be determined by the Court.[6] [6] Jonah & White (2012) FLC 93-522; Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10…
Sam and Lamothe
[2016] FamCA 576 Para 16

…1 at [66]: The fact that such statements are made to lenders or government authorities does not elevate them to a higher status. In Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 McColl JA said at [99]: Statements to a government authority apparently inconsistent with a party’s case may complicate the resolution of the issue of…
Saravinovska v Saravinovski (No 6)
[2016] NSWSC 964

…42 NSWLR 70 Fulton v Fulton [2014] NSWSC 619 Grech v Walsh [2007] NSWSC 302 Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (1959) 101 CLR 298 Kardos v Sarbutt [2006] NSWCA 11 Klein v Law Society of NSW (Court of Appeal NSW), 4 September 1987, unreported Kuhl v Zurich Financial Services [2011] HCA 11;…
Balcomb and Daley
[2016] FCCA 1635 Para 3

…. 2. The fact that such statements are made to lenders or government authorities does not elevate them to a higher status. In Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 McColl JA said at [99]: Statements to a government authority apparently inconsistent with a party’s case may complicate the resolution of the issue of the na…
WILSON & JEANS
[2015] FamCA 688 Para 17

…In Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10, McColl JA neatly summarised the authorities in this approach: ...definitions of relationships are not to be dissected into discrete elements, an approach endorsed by Mason P, Tobias JA and Davies AJA in Bar-Mordecai v Hillston [2004] NSWCA 65 at [86], [125]. What this means prac…
Yesilhat v Calokerinos
[2015] NSWSC 1028 Para 34

…In Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 at [83] McColl JA cited with approval the statement of Barrett J in Peterson v Gregory [2007] NSWSC 8 (at [11]) that the concept of living together as a couple was of a “ personal commitment that is mutually acknowledged and of an emotional kind transcending the mere fact of the…
Sadiq v NSW Trustee & Guardian
[2015] NSWSC 716 Para 68

…tatements may be taken into account as part of the mosaic of circumstances that the court must consider in reaching the conclusion: Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10, per McColl JA, at [99].…
RENNIE & DRISCOLL
[2015] FamCA 467 Para 23

…or concept, and therefore has to be approached by considering the expression as a whole and not in several parts”. 49. In Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10, McColl JA held that the effect of earlier decisions of the New South Wales courts, including the Court of Appeal, meant that “practically, [it is] ... necessary…
CHAM & SHA
[2015] FamCA 355 Para 4

…fore has to be approached by considering the expression as a whole and not in several parts”. 49.In Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10, McColl JA held that the effect of earlier decisions of the New South Wales courts, including the Court of Appeal, meant that “practically, [it is] … necessary to consider the evidenc…
Jenkins and Anor and Cowper
[2015] FCCA 357 Para 7

…ddress that the parties live at to determine whether a de-facto relationship exists. See Greenwood v Merkel [2004] NSWSC 43 and Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10. b)The concept of “living together” is at the heart of a de facto relationship. It is important as it provides a distinction between parties living togethe…

View all 95 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 37 of 37 shown

Black v Black
[2013] NSWSC 954

…a 505; (1722) 93 ER 664 Bar-Mordecai v Hillston [2004] NSWCA 65 Barnes v De Jesus [2001] NSWSC 19 Bilous v Mudaliar [2006] NSWCA 38 Black v Black (1991) 15 Fam LR 109 Burden v Cottee (Supreme Court of New South Wales, Bryson J, 31 July 1998, unreported) Chanter v Catts [2005] NSWCA 411; (2005) 64 NSWLR 360 Davey v Lee…
Elite Protective Personnel Pty Ltd v Salmon (No 2)
[2007] NSWCA 373

…688 Dridi v Fillmore [2001] NSWSC 319 Dunstan v Rickwood (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 266 Elite Protective Personnel Pty Ltd v Salmon (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 373 Fung v Ye [2007] NSWCA 115 Government Insurance Office of New South Wales v Rozniak (1992) 27 NSWLR 665 Greenwood v Merkel [2004] NSWSC 43 House v R [1936] HCA 40; (19…
Dunstan v Rickwood (No 2)
[2007] NSWCA 266

…[2005] NSWCA 411; (2005) 64 NSWLR 360 Davey v Lee (1990) 13 Fam LR 688 Dridi v Fillmore [2001] NSWSC 319 Dunstan v Rickwood (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 266 Elite Protective Personnel Pty Ltd v Salmon (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 373 Fung v Ye [2007] NSWCA 115 Government Insurance Office of New South Wales v Rozniak (1992) 27 NSWLR…
Manns v Kennedy
[2007] NSWCA 217

…[2006] NSWCA 11 Kardos v Sarbutt (No 2) [2006] NSWCA 206 Mcdonald v Stelzer [2000] NSWCA 302; (2001) 27 Fam LR 304 Manns v Kennedy [2007] NSWCA 217 Metropolitan Water Sewerage & Drainage Board v Histon [1982] 2 NSWLR 720 O’Brien v Tanning Research Laboratories Inc (1988) 14 NSWLR 601 Paino v Paino [2006] NSWSC 218…
Skulander v Willoughby City Council
[2007] NSWCA 116

…R 454 Saric v Steward [2006] NSWCA 260 Simonis v Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd (1987) 21 NSWLR 677 Skulander v Willoughby City Council [2007] NSWCA 116 Southgate v Waterford (1990) 21 NSWLR 427 Sullman v Sullman [2002] NSWSC 169 Tasmania v Victoria [1935] HCA 4; (1935) 52 CLR 157 Trustees of the Property of John Daniel…
Fung v Ye
[2007] NSWCA 115

…NSWSC 319 Dunstan v Rickwood (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 266 Elite Protective Personnel Pty Ltd v Salmon (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 373 Fung v Ye [2007] NSWCA 115 Government Insurance Office of New South Wales v Rozniak (1992) 27 NSWLR 665 Greenwood v Merkel [2004] NSWSC 43 House v R [1936] HCA 40; (1936) 55 CLR 499 Howlett v Ne…
Petersen v Gregory
[2007] NSWSC 8

…82] 2 NSWLR 720 O’Brien v Tanning Research Laboratories Inc (1988) 14 NSWLR 601 Paino v Paino [2006] NSWSC 218 Petersen v Gregory [2007] NSWSC 8 PY v CY [2005] QCA 247 Re Fagan Deceased [1980] 5 Fam LR 813 Roy v Sturgeon (1986) 11 NSWLR 454 Saric v Steward [2006] NSWCA 260 Simonis v Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd (1987…
Saric v Steward
[2006] NSWCA 260

…ry [2007] NSWSC 8 PY v CY [2005] QCA 247 Re Fagan Deceased [1980] 5 Fam LR 813 Roy v Sturgeon (1986) 11 NSWLR 454 Saric v Steward [2006] NSWCA 260 Simonis v Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd (1987) 21 NSWLR 677 Skulander v Willoughby City Council [2007] NSWCA 116 Southgate v Waterford (1990) 21 NSWLR 427 Sullman v Sullman […
Kardos v Sarbutt (No 2)
[2006] NSWCA 206

…8; (1959) 101 CLR 298 Jones v Grech [2001] NSWCA 208; (2001) 27 Fam LR 711 Kardos v Sarbutt [2006] NSWCA 11 Kardos v Sarbutt (No 2) [2006] NSWCA 206 Mcdonald v Stelzer [2000] NSWCA 302; (2001) 27 Fam LR 304 Manns v Kennedy [2007] NSWCA 217 Metropolitan Water Sewerage & Drainage Board v Histon [1982] 2 NSWLR 720 O’B…
Chanter v Catts (No 2)
[2006] NSWCA 179

…Fam LR 109 Burden v Cottee (Supreme Court of New South Wales, Bryson J, 31 July 1998, unreported) Chanter v Catts [2005] NSWCA 411; (2005) 64 NSWLR 360 Davey v Lee (1990) 13 Fam LR 688 Dridi v Fillmore [2001] NSWSC 319 Dunstan v Rickwood (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 266 Elite Protective Personnel Pty Ltd v Salmon (No 2) [2007]…
Bilous v Mudaliar
[2006] NSWCA 38

…rie (1722) 1 Stra 505; (1722) 93 ER 664 Bar-Mordecai v Hillston [2004] NSWCA 65 Barnes v De Jesus [2001] NSWSC 19 Bilous v Mudaliar [2006] NSWCA 38 Black v Black (1991) 15 Fam LR 109 Burden v Cottee (Supreme Court of New South Wales, Bryson J, 31 July 1998, unreported) Chanter v Catts [2005] NSWCA 411; (2005) 64 N…
Ye v Fung
[2006] NSWSC 243

…6) 80 ALJR 589 Weston v Public Trustee (1986) 4 NSWLR 407 White v White [2004] NSWSC 208 Wilson v Vine [2003] NSWSC 341 Ye v Fung [2006] NSWSC 243 PARTIES: Craig Darren Hayes - Appellant Deborah Mary Marquis - Respondent FILE NUMBER(S): CA 40212 of 2006 COUNSEL: Ms M Bridger - Appellant Mr J Wilson SC with R Winfie…
Paino v Paino
[2006] NSWSC 218

…werage & Drainage Board v Histon [1982] 2 NSWLR 720 O’Brien v Tanning Research Laboratories Inc (1988) 14 NSWLR 601 Paino v Paino [2006] NSWSC 218 Petersen v Gregory [2007] NSWSC 8 PY v CY [2005] QCA 247 Re Fagan Deceased [1980] 5 Fam LR 813 Roy v Sturgeon (1986) 11 NSWLR 454 Saric v Steward [2006] NSWCA 260 Simoni…
Trustees of the Property of Cummins (A Bankrupt) v Cummins
[2006] HCA 6

…an [2002] NSWSC 169 Tasmania v Victoria [1935] HCA 4; (1935) 52 CLR 157 Trustees of the Property of John Daniel Cummins v Cummins [2006] HCA 6; (2006) 80 ALJR 589 Weston v Public Trustee (1986) 4 NSWLR 407 White v White [2004] NSWSC 208 Wilson v Vine [2003] NSWSC 341 Ye v Fung [2006] NSWSC 243 PARTIES: Craig Da…
Kardos v Sarbutt
[2006] NSWCA 11

…24 NSWLR 259 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (1959) 101 CLR 298 Jones v Grech [2001] NSWCA 208; (2001) 27 Fam LR 711 Kardos v Sarbutt [2006] NSWCA 11 Kardos v Sarbutt (No 2) [2006] NSWCA 206 Mcdonald v Stelzer [2000] NSWCA 302; (2001) 27 Fam LR 304 Manns v Kennedy [2007] NSWCA 217 Metropolitan Water Sewerage & Drain…
Chanter v Catts
[2005] NSWCA 411

…v Black (1991) 15 Fam LR 109 Burden v Cottee (Supreme Court of New South Wales, Bryson J, 31 July 1998, unreported) Chanter v Catts [2005] NSWCA 411; (2005) 64 NSWLR 360 Davey v Lee (1990) 13 Fam LR 688 Dridi v Fillmore [2001] NSWSC 319 Dunstan v Rickwood (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 266 Elite Protective Personnel Pty Ltd v…
James v Surf Road Nominees Pty Ltd (No 2)
[2005] NSWCA 296

…A 40; (1936) 55 CLR 499 Howlett v Neilson [2005] NSWCA 149 Hughes v Egger [2005] NSWSC 18 James v Surf Road Nominees Pty Ltd (No 2) [2005] NSWCA 296 John Fairfax & Sons Ltd v Carson (1991) 24 NSWLR 259 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (1959) 101 CLR 298 Jones v Grech [2001] NSWCA 208; (2001) 27 Fam LR 711 Kardos v Sarb…
PY v CY
[2005] QCA 247

…v Tanning Research Laboratories Inc (1988) 14 NSWLR 601 Paino v Paino [2006] NSWSC 218 Petersen v Gregory [2007] NSWSC 8 PY v CY [2005] QCA 247 Re Fagan Deceased [1980] 5 Fam LR 813 Roy v Sturgeon (1986) 11 NSWLR 454 Saric v Steward [2006] NSWCA 260 Simonis v Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd (1987) 21 NSWLR 677 Skulande…
Howlett v Neilson
[2005] NSWCA 149

…Wales v Rozniak (1992) 27 NSWLR 665 Greenwood v Merkel [2004] NSWSC 43 House v R [1936] HCA 40; (1936) 55 CLR 499 Howlett v Neilson [2005] NSWCA 149 Hughes v Egger [2005] NSWSC 18 James v Surf Road Nominees Pty Ltd (No 2) [2005] NSWCA 296 John Fairfax & Sons Ltd v Carson (1991) 24 NSWLR 259 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HC…
Hughes v Egger
[2005] NSWSC 18

…665 Greenwood v Merkel [2004] NSWSC 43 House v R [1936] HCA 40; (1936) 55 CLR 499 Howlett v Neilson [2005] NSWCA 149 Hughes v Egger [2005] NSWSC 18 James v Surf Road Nominees Pty Ltd (No 2) [2005] NSWCA 296 John Fairfax & Sons Ltd v Carson (1991) 24 NSWLR 259 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (1959) 101 CLR 298 Jones v…
White v White
[2004] NSWSC 208

…operty of John Daniel Cummins v Cummins [2006] HCA 6; (2006) 80 ALJR 589 Weston v Public Trustee (1986) 4 NSWLR 407 White v White [2004] NSWSC 208 Wilson v Vine [2003] NSWSC 341 Ye v Fung [2006] NSWSC 243 PARTIES: Craig Darren Hayes - Appellant Deborah Mary Marquis - Respondent FILE NUMBER(S): CA 40212 of 2006 COUN…
Bar-Mordecai v Hillston
[2004] NSWCA 65

…Rules 2005 CATEGORY: Principal judgment CASES CITED: Armory v Delamirie (1722) 1 Stra 505; (1722) 93 ER 664 Bar-Mordecai v Hillston [2004] NSWCA 65 Barnes v De Jesus [2001] NSWSC 19 Bilous v Mudaliar [2006] NSWCA 38 Black v Black (1991) 15 Fam LR 109 Burden v Cottee (Supreme Court of New South Wales, Bryson J, 31…
Greenwood v Merkel
[2004] NSWSC 43

…SWCA 373 Fung v Ye [2007] NSWCA 115 Government Insurance Office of New South Wales v Rozniak (1992) 27 NSWLR 665 Greenwood v Merkel [2004] NSWSC 43 House v R [1936] HCA 40; (1936) 55 CLR 499 Howlett v Neilson [2005] NSWCA 149 Hughes v Egger [2005] NSWSC 18 James v Surf Road Nominees Pty Ltd (No 2) [2005] NSWCA 296…
Wilson v Vine
[2003] NSWSC 341

…Cummins [2006] HCA 6; (2006) 80 ALJR 589 Weston v Public Trustee (1986) 4 NSWLR 407 White v White [2004] NSWSC 208 Wilson v Vine [2003] NSWSC 341 Ye v Fung [2006] NSWSC 243 PARTIES: Craig Darren Hayes - Appellant Deborah Mary Marquis - Respondent FILE NUMBER(S): CA 40212 of 2006 COUNSEL: Ms M Bridger - Appellant M…
Sullman v Sullman
[2002] NSWSC 169

…87) 21 NSWLR 677 Skulander v Willoughby City Council [2007] NSWCA 116 Southgate v Waterford (1990) 21 NSWLR 427 Sullman v Sullman [2002] NSWSC 169 Tasmania v Victoria [1935] HCA 4; (1935) 52 CLR 157 Trustees of the Property of John Daniel Cummins v Cummins [2006] HCA 6; (2006) 80 ALJR 589 Weston v Public Trustee (1…
Jones v Grech
[2001] NSWCA 208

…[2005] NSWCA 296 John Fairfax & Sons Ltd v Carson (1991) 24 NSWLR 259 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (1959) 101 CLR 298 Jones v Grech [2001] NSWCA 208; (2001) 27 Fam LR 711 Kardos v Sarbutt [2006] NSWCA 11 Kardos v Sarbutt (No 2) [2006] NSWCA 206 Mcdonald v Stelzer [2000] NSWCA 302; (2001) 27 Fam LR 304 Manns v Kenne…
Dridi v Fillmore
[2001] NSWSC 319

…, 31 July 1998, unreported) Chanter v Catts [2005] NSWCA 411; (2005) 64 NSWLR 360 Davey v Lee (1990) 13 Fam LR 688 Dridi v Fillmore [2001] NSWSC 319 Dunstan v Rickwood (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 266 Elite Protective Personnel Pty Ltd v Salmon (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 373 Fung v Ye [2007] NSWCA 115 Government Insurance Office o…
Barnes v De Jesus
[2001] NSWSC 19

…gment CASES CITED: Armory v Delamirie (1722) 1 Stra 505; (1722) 93 ER 664 Bar-Mordecai v Hillston [2004] NSWCA 65 Barnes v De Jesus [2001] NSWSC 19 Bilous v Mudaliar [2006] NSWCA 38 Black v Black (1991) 15 Fam LR 109 Burden v Cottee (Supreme Court of New South Wales, Bryson J, 31 July 1998, unreported) Chanter v C…
McDonald v Stelzer
[2000] NSWCA 302

…[2001] NSWCA 208; (2001) 27 Fam LR 711 Kardos v Sarbutt [2006] NSWCA 11 Kardos v Sarbutt (No 2) [2006] NSWCA 206 Mcdonald v Stelzer [2000] NSWCA 302; (2001) 27 Fam LR 304 Manns v Kennedy [2007] NSWCA 217 Metropolitan Water Sewerage & Drainage Board v Histon [1982] 2 NSWLR 720 O’Brien v Tanning Research Laboratories…
Rosniak v Government Insurance Office of NSW
[1998] HCATrans 78

…sonnel Pty Ltd v Salmon (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 373 Fung v Ye [2007] NSWCA 115 Government Insurance Office of New South Wales v Rozniak (1992) 27 NSWLR 665 Greenwood v Merkel [2004] NSWSC 43 House v R [1936] HCA 40; (1936) 55 CLR 499 Howlett v Neilson [2005] NSWCA 149 Hughes v Egger [2005] NSWSC 18 James v Surf Road Nomin…
Carson v John Fairfax & Sons Ltd
[1993] HCA 31

…SWCA 149 Hughes v Egger [2005] NSWSC 18 James v Surf Road Nominees Pty Ltd (No 2) [2005] NSWCA 296 John Fairfax & Sons Ltd v Carson (1991) 24 NSWLR 259 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (1959) 101 CLR 298 Jones v Grech [2001] NSWCA 208; (2001) 27 Fam LR 711 Kardos v Sarbutt [2006] NSWCA 11 Kardos v Sarbutt (No 2) [2006] NS…
Tanning Research laboratories Inc v O'Brien
[1990] HCA 8

…7] NSWCA 217 Metropolitan Water Sewerage & Drainage Board v Histon [1982] 2 NSWLR 720 O’Brien v Tanning Research Laboratories Inc (1988) 14 NSWLR 601 Paino v Paino [2006] NSWSC 218 Petersen v Gregory [2007] NSWSC 8 PY v CY [2005] QCA 247 Re Fagan Deceased [1980] 5 Fam LR 813 Roy v Sturgeon (1986) 11 NSWLR 454 Saric v…
Jones v Dunkel
[1959] HCA 8

…C 18 James v Surf Road Nominees Pty Ltd (No 2) [2005] NSWCA 296 John Fairfax & Sons Ltd v Carson (1991) 24 NSWLR 259 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (1959) 101 CLR 298 Jones v Grech [2001] NSWCA 208; (2001) 27 Fam LR 711 Kardos v Sarbutt [2006] NSWCA 11 Kardos v Sarbutt (No 2) [2006] NSWCA 206 Mcdonald v Stelzer […
Tasmania v Victoria
[1935] HCA 4

…by City Council [2007] NSWCA 116 Southgate v Waterford (1990) 21 NSWLR 427 Sullman v Sullman [2002] NSWSC 169 Tasmania v Victoria [1935] HCA 4; (1935) 52 CLR 157 Trustees of the Property of John Daniel Cummins v Cummins [2006] HCA 6; (2006) 80 ALJR 589 Weston v Public Trustee (1986) 4 NSWLR 407 White v White [2…
House v R
[1936] HCA 40

…NSWCA 115 Government Insurance Office of New South Wales v Rozniak (1992) 27 NSWLR 665 Greenwood v Merkel [2004] NSWSC 43 House v R [1936] HCA 40; (1936) 55 CLR 499 Howlett v Neilson [2005] NSWCA 149 Hughes v Egger [2005] NSWSC 18 James v Surf Road Nominees Pty Ltd (No 2) [2005] NSWCA 296 John Fairfax & Sons Ltd…
Armory v Delamirie
93 ER 664

…roperty (Relationships) Legislation Amendment Act 1999 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 CATEGORY: Principal judgment CASES CITED: Armory v Delamirie (1722) 1 Stra 505; (1722) 93 ER 664 Bar-Mordecai v Hillston [2004] NSWCA 65 Barnes v De Jesus [2001] NSWSC 19 Bilous v Mudaliar [2006] NSWCA 38 Black v Black (1991) 15 Fam LR…
Armory v Delamirie
(1722) 93 ER 664

…endment Act 1999 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 CATEGORY: Principal judgment CASES CITED: Armory v Delamirie (1722) 1 Stra 505; (1722) 93 ER 664 Bar-Mordecai v Hillston [2004] NSWCA 65 Barnes v De Jesus [2001] NSWSC 19 Bilous v Mudaliar [2006] NSWCA 38 Black v Black (1991) 15 Fam LR 109 Burden v Cottee (Supreme…

Legislation cited in this decision · 6

Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW)
98 2 mentions
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)
42.1 2 mentions
De Facto Relationships Act 1984 (NSW)
1 mention
Family Provision Act 1982 (NSW)
1 mention
Property (Relationships) Act 1984 (NSW)
1 mention
Property (Relationships) Legislation Amendment Act 1999 (NSW)
1 mention

CITATION:	Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.
HEARING DATE(S):	16 May 2007
JUDGMENT DATE:	22 February 2008
JUDGMENT OF:	Beazley JA at 1; McColl JA at 19; Einstein J at 151
DECISION:	1 Appeal allowed. 2. Set aside the verdict in favour of the respondent in the sum of $120,000. 3. Order that there be judgment for the respondent in the sum of $100,000. 4. Order that each party pay his and her own costs of the appeal.
CATCHWORDS:	FAMILY LAW AND CHILD WELFARE – Property (Relationships) Act 1984 – s 5(1)(b) – whether parties in a "close personal relationship" where not living continuously in the same house – whether "personal care" in s 5(1)(b) includes emotional support – relevance to determination of relationship of non-disclosure of cohabitation to government authorities – adjustment of property interests – failure to take into account part of appellant’s assets – obligation of parties to property relationship proceedings to make full and frank disclosure of relevant financial circumstances.
LEGISLATION CITED:	Civil Procedure Act 2005 De Facto Relationships Act 1984 Family Provision Act 1982 Property (Relationships) Act 1984 Property (Relationships) Legislation Amendment Act 1999 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005
CATEGORY:	Principal judgment
CASES CITED:	Armory v Delamirie (1722) 1 Stra 505; (1722) 93 ER 664 Bar-Mordecai v Hillston [2004] NSWCA 65 Barnes v De Jesus [2001] NSWSC 19 Bilous v Mudaliar [2006] NSWCA 38 Black v Black (1991) 15 Fam LR 109 Burden v Cottee (Supreme Court of New South Wales, Bryson J, 31 July 1998, unreported) Chanter v Catts [2005] NSWCA 411; (2005) 64 NSWLR 360 Davey v Lee (1990) 13 Fam LR 688 Dridi v Fillmore [2001] NSWSC 319 Dunstan v Rickwood (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 266 Elite Protective Personnel Pty Ltd v Salmon (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 373 Fung v Ye [2007] NSWCA 115 Government Insurance Office of New South Wales v Rozniak (1992) 27 NSWLR 665 Greenwood v Merkel [2004] NSWSC 43 House v R [1936] HCA 40; (1936) 55 CLR 499 Howlett v Neilson [2005] NSWCA 149 Hughes v Egger [2005] NSWSC 18 James v Surf Road Nominees Pty Ltd (No 2) [2005] NSWCA 296 John Fairfax & Sons Ltd v Carson (1991) 24 NSWLR 259 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (1959) 101 CLR 298 Jones v Grech [2001] NSWCA 208; (2001) 27 Fam LR 711 Kardos v Sarbutt [2006] NSWCA 11 Kardos v Sarbutt (No 2) [2006] NSWCA 206 Mcdonald v Stelzer [2000] NSWCA 302; (2001) 27 Fam LR 304 Manns v Kennedy [2007] NSWCA 217 Metropolitan Water Sewerage & Drainage Board v Histon [1982] 2 NSWLR 720 O’Brien v Tanning Research Laboratories Inc (1988) 14 NSWLR 601 Paino v Paino [2006] NSWSC 218 Petersen v Gregory [2007] NSWSC 8 PY v CY [2005] QCA 247 Re Fagan Deceased [1980] 5 Fam LR 813 Roy v Sturgeon (1986)