FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| OLLIE & NORWOOD | [2015] FCCA 71 |
| Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – Practice and procedure (?) – de facto property application under s.90SM of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – s.90SB(a) applied to application – Respondent issued proceedings under Property Law Act 1958 (Vic) in the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal – consideration of meaning of ‘substantial contribution’ under ss.90SM(4)(a), (b) and (c) – consideration of meaning of ‘serious injustice’ in s.90SB(c)(ii) – substantial contribution found under s.90SM(4)(a) – Court not satisfied that failure to make the order would result in serious injustice to the Applicant – application dismissed. |
| Legislation: Domestic Relationships Act 1994 (ACT), s.15(1) Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss.90SB, 90SM(4) Property Law Act 1974 (Qld), ss.276, 286 |
| Davies v Johnston (Revised) (Real Property) [2014] VCAT 512 Gibbons v Vowles (2003) 22 FRNZ 946 Henry v Williams [2004] 2 NZLR 132 Lee & Hutton [2013] FamCA 745 LF v RA (2005) 34 Fam LR 536 LS v ZJ [2005] NZFLR 932 Mallet & Mallet (1984) 156 CLR 605 McMaster & Wilkie-Snow [2011] ACTSC 183 Miller & Trent (2011) 250 FLR 387 Rolfe & Rolfe (1979) FLC 90-269 V & K [2005] FCWA 80 Van Jole v Cole (2000) 26 Fam LR 228 Wall & Mitchell [2012] FamCA 114 Wentworth v Wentworth (1995) 37 NSWLR 703 X and Y [2010] NZHC 287 |
Applicant: | MS OLLIE |
| Respondent: | MR NORWOOD |
| File Number: | MLC 8579 of 2014 |
| Judgment of: | Judge Whelan |
| Hearing date: | 18 December 2014 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 18 December 2014 |
| Delivered at: | Melbourne |
| Delivered on: | 23 January 2015 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | Ms H Renwick |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Brygel Lawyers |
| Counsel for the Respondent: | Mr D Dudderidge |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Nevile & Co Lawyers |
ORDERS
The Application filed on 24 September 2014 is dismissed.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Ollie & Norwood is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
| FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE |
MLC 8579 of 2014
| MS OLLIE |
Applicant
And
| MR NORWOOD |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Introduction
This is an application by MS OLLIE (“the Applicant”) under Part VIIIAB, Division 2 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”) in which she seeks the following final orders:
1. The applicant retain the proceeds of sale of the property situate at Property K.
2. That the respondent do all things necessary, including signing any documents necessary to enable the applicant to transfer use of mobile telephone number (omitted) to an account in her sole name.
3. That the respondent pay the applicant’s costs of and incidental to this application.[1]
[1] Initiating Application filed by Ms Ollie on 24 September 2014, at p.2.
It is not disputed that the Applicant and the Respondent Mr NORWOOD (“the Respondent”) commenced cohabitation in (omitted) 2013 at Property K (“the property”) and that the Respondent vacated the property in…
Continue reading Ollie and Norwood
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Ollie and Norwood [2015] FCCA 71
- Case
- [2015] FCCA 71
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the Court was whether the application, as filed by the applicant on 24 September 2014, should be dismissed. The Court was required to determine the merits of the application in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence presented.
Judge Whelan ultimately dismissed the application. The reasoning behind this decision, and the specific legal principles that led to this outcome, are not elaborated upon in the provided excerpt. The Court's final order was that the application filed on 24 September 2014 be dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
The Application filed on 24 September 2014 is dismissed.
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.