Keene & Scofield (No.2)

[2013] FCCA 1107

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

KEENE & SCOFIELD (No.2) [2013] FCCA 1107

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – De facto relationship – application for declaration that de facto relationship existed between applicant and respondent – relationship between parties lasted approximately six years – parties own adjoining properties in suburban Adelaide – whether parties had common residence and degree of commonality – disputed evidence as to sleeping arrangements – disputed evidence as to degree of financial interdependence – parties holidayed and socialised together – evidence regarding public aspects of relationship – nature of applicant’s involvement with respondent’s children – definition of de facto relationship – were parties living together on a genuine domestic basis – burden of proof – whether applicant has satisfied onus of proof as to existence of de facto relationship.

Legislation:  
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss.4AA; 90RD; 90SM

Evidence Act1995 (Cth), s.140

Keene & Scofield [2013] FCCA 540
Keene & Scofield (No.2) [2012] FMCAfam 1357
Jonah v White (2012) 45 FamLR 460
Corporation of the City Enfield v Development Assessment Commission (2000) 199 CLR 135
Taisha v Peng (2013) 48 FamLR 150
Moby & Schulter (2010) FLC 93-447
Shelley & Markhov [2012] FCWA 68
Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298
RPS v R (2000) 199 CLR 620

Applicant: MR KEENE

Respondent: MS SCOFIELD

File Number: ADC 983 of 2011

Judgment of: Judge Brown

Hearing dates: 31 January, 1 February, 12, 13 & 14 February, 10 April & 10 May 2013

Date of Last Submission: 10 May 2013

Delivered at: Adelaide

Delivered on: 2 September 2013

REPRESENTATION

Solicitors for the Applicant: Angela Ferdinandy Solicitor then In Person from 10 April 2013

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Berman SC then In person

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr McGinn

Solicitors for the Respondent: Howe Martin & Associates

ORDERS

1. The application and the response herein are dismissed save as to the issue of costs.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Keene & Scofield (No.2) is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

AT ADELAIDE

ADC 983 of 2011

MR KEENE

Applicant

And

MS SCOFIELD

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. Mr Keene “the applicant” and Ms Scofield “the respondent” have known each other since mid-2004.  Undoubtedly, there is some form of relationship between the two.  These proceedings are concerned with characterising the nature of this relationship. 

2. From Mr Keene’s perspective, he and Ms Scofield were a committed couple from (omitted) 2006 onwards, who shared every aspect of life together and who were engaged to be married.  He asserts that he was a surrogate parent for Ms Scofield’s two children – X born (omitted) 1993 and Y born (omitted) 1999.

3. From Ms Scofield’s perspective, the relationship between the two has waxed and waned in its degree of intimacy but never reached a point where it could be considered to be a coupling of two individuals into a common unit.  At times, she would categorise Mr Keene as her boyfriend,…