Regan and Walsh

Case [2014] FCCA 2535


FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

REGAN & WALSH [2014] FCCA 2535
Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – De facto property – threshold consideration of whether a de facto relationship exists so as to afford jurisdiction – factors to be considered – influence and significance of financial considerations when little else is agreed – insufficient evidence to satisfy the Court that the parties were in a relationship as a couple – finding of no jurisdiction.

Legislation:  

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss.4AA(1), (2), 90RD
De Facto Relationships Act 1984 (NSW)

S v B(No 2) (2004) 32 FamLR 429
Roy v Sturgeon (1986) 11 FamLR 271
Barry & Dalrymple [2010] FamCA 1271
Lynam v Director-General of Social Security (1983) 52 ALR 128
Truman & Clifton (2010) FCWA 91
Applicant: MR REGAN
Respondent: MR WALSH
File Number: BRC 2755 of 2013
Judgment of: Judge Coker
Hearing date: 12 June 2014
Date of Last Submission: 12 June 2014
Delivered at: Townsville
Delivered on: 6 November 2014

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Kronberg
Solicitors for the Applicant: RD Martin & Co
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Creamer
Solicitors for the Respondent: Australian Law Group

DECLARATION

  1. Pursuant to Section 90RD of the Family Law Act 1975, that a de facto relationship, as defined pursuant to the provisions of section 4AA, never existed between the Applicant and the Respondent.

ORDERS:

  1. That the Application of 12 April 2013 and Response of 2 August 2013 be dismissed.

  2. That should there be any application for costs, written submissions be filed and served by the Respondent within 21 days of the date of this Order and any submissions by the Applicant be filed and served within 35 days of the date of this Order.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Regan & Walsh is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

AT TOWNSVILLE

BRC 2755 of 2013

MR REGAN

Applicant

And

MR WALSH

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

INTRODUCTION:

  1. On 12 April 2013, Mr Regan, whom I shall refer to as the applicant, filed an initiating application seeking orders in relation to a de facto property settlement. As is required in relation to a determination of that nature, the first order that was sought was the making of a declaration that a de facto relationship existed between the applicant and the respondent to the application, Mr Walsh.

  2. The applicant went on to note that subject to the declaration being made, then that there should be a property distribution between the applicant and the respondent, so as to effect a distribution to the applicant of 40 per cent and a distribution to the respondent of 60 per cent by way of final property settlement.  Additionally, the applicant sought an order with regard to the respondent paying his costs of and incidental to the proceedings and any other orders that might otherwise be appropriate or proper. 

  3. The response to the initiating application was filed on 2 August…

Continue reading Regan and Walsh

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Regan and Walsh [2014] FCCA 2535
Case
[2014] FCCA 2535
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Regan and Walsh*, heard before Judge Coker, the dispute concerned an application and a response filed by the parties. The precise nature of the dispute is not detailed in the provided text, but it involved an application made on 12 April 2013 and a response filed on 2 August 2013.

The central legal issue before the court was to determine the outcome of the application and the response filed by the parties. The court was required to consider the merits of the application and the response in order to make a determination.

Judge Coker dismissed both the Application of 12 April 2013 and the Response of 2 August 2013. The court also made orders regarding the filing of written submissions concerning costs, should any party choose to pursue them. The Respondent has 21 days from the date of the order to file submissions, and the Applicant has 35 days from the date of the order to file their submissions.

Orders

Orders of the court

2.

That the Application of 12 April 2013 and Response of 2 August 2013 be dismissed.

3.

That should there be any application for costs, written submissions be filed and served by the Respondent within 21 days of the date of this Order and any submissions by the Applicant be filed and served within 35 days of the date of this Order.

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.