Skoflek v Baftirovski

This matter came before the High Court of Australia on an application for special leave to appeal. The applicant, Mr. Skoflek, sought to appeal a decision of the Full Court. The dispute concerned the interpretation of "marital relationship" within the context of the *Family Law Act*.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether a "marital relationship," as contemplated by section 4(1)(ca)(i) of the *Family Law Act*, could subsist after the parties had been legally divorced. Specifically, the applicant argued that the Full Court had erred in its construction of this term, contending that it encompassed a broader concept than merely the legal status of marriage.

The applicant’s argument, as presented to the High Court, was that "marital relationship" should be understood as referring to a continuous cohabitation between the parties, irrespective of whether they remained legally married. This was contrasted with "matrimonial cause," which was understood to fall within the scope of the *Family Law Act* and the Commonwealth's legislative powers. The applicant relied on a passage from a Full Court decision in *B and B* (1985) Fam LR, which suggested that a marital relationship could continue after a legal divorce, provided there was a nexus to the original marital relationship. The applicant conceded that the existence of such a nexus was a question of fact, but argued that the present case presented a suitable vehicle for the High Court to clarify the extent and nature of this required nexus.