TEH & MUIR

The case of TEH & MUIR concerned a dispute heard by Berman J in the context of family law. The applicant alleged the existence of a de facto relationship with the respondent, which the respondent denied. Additionally, a binding financial agreement, prepared under section 90UC of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), was challenged.

The court was required to determine two primary legal issues: firstly, whether a de facto relationship existed between the parties, and secondly, whether the binding financial agreement should be set aside. The latter issue involved consideration of whether the applicant engaged in unconscionable conduct, particularly in light of the respondent's dementia and the applicant's pursuit of personal financial advantage.

In reaching its decision, the court found that despite evidence of the parties living under the same roof, there was a lack of observable commitment to a shared life. Furthermore, the applicant's conduct was deemed inconsistent with a loving relationship, leading to a finding that no de facto relationship ever existed. Regarding the financial agreement, the court determined that the applicant's actions constituted unconscionable conduct, exploiting the respondent's dementia for her own financial gain, and therefore the agreement should be set aside.

Consequently, Berman J ordered that there be a finding that the parties were not at any stage in a de facto relationship. The binding financial agreement dated 19 February 2015 was set aside. Further orders were made to discharge a previous order and ensure that any remaining funds in the trust account of Culshaw Miller Divorce and Family Lawyers, after payment of outstanding legal fees, were to be made available to the respondent through his case guardian.