Quincey & Quincey

The case of Quincey & Quincey involved a dispute between the husband, the appellant, and the wife, the respondent, concerning a Binding Financial Agreement (BFA) signed by the parties in 2018. The wife sought to set aside the BFA in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, and the husband subsequently appealed against the court's order setting aside the agreement. The appeal was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, Division 1 Appellate Jurisdiction.

The appeal raised several grounds, primarily focusing on whether the primary judge had correctly found material non-disclosure by the husband and whether the wife was estopped from denying the BFA's binding nature. The husband argued that the primary judge was restricted to the non-disclosure issue advanced by the wife in her pleadings, which was incorrect. The court emphasised that cases are determined on the evidence, not the pleadings. It further noted that even if another judge might have reached a different conclusion, the primary judge's findings were reasonably open based on the evidence presented. The husband also contended that the primary judge erred in fact, but this argument failed as the findings were reasonably supported by the evidence.

The court dismissed the appeal and ordered the husband to pay the wife's costs in a fixed sum of $21,415.95 within 28 days. The reasons for the judgment were that the primary judge's findings of material non-disclosure and the consequent setting aside of the BFA were supported by the evidence, and the husband's arguments did not persuade the appellate court to alter those findings. The court's order was final, subject to minor corrections or variations as permitted by the rules.