Vaughan & Bele

Case [2011] FamCA 436

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VAUGHAN & BELE [2011] FamCA 436
FAMILY LAW – DE FACTO RELATIONSHIP – Where applicant seeks declaration that a de facto relationship existed under s 90RD of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where evidence of the applicant was generally preferred to that of the respondent – Where the parties were living as a couple and were sharing all of the activities that one would normally expect in a domestic partnership – The relationship was a de facto relationship – The de facto relationship did not come to an end until the respondent formally made the announcement to the applicant to end the relationship on 2 March 2009.
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), s 4AA, s 90RD
Family Law Amendment (De Facto Financial Matters and Other Measures) Act 2008 (Cth)
Moby & Schulter [2010] FamCA 748; (2010) FLC 93-447
APPLICANT: Mr Vaughan
RESPONDENT: Ms Bele
FILE NUMBER: MLC 9056 of 2009
DATE DELIVERED: 9 June 2011
PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne
PLACE HEARD: Melbourne
JUDGMENT OF: Cronin J
HEARING DATE: 15, 16 & 17 March 2011

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: MR Sweeney
SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Mills Oakley Lawyers
COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr St John SC
SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Susan Snyder

Orders

IT IS DECLARED THAT

  1. Pursuant to sections 90RD and 4AA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) a de facto relationship existed between the applicant and the respondent and that it came to an end on 2 March 2009.

IT IS ORDERED THAT

  1. That all extant applications for final orders be otherwise referred to the Registrar to await the allocation of  a hearing in accordance with the declaration referred to in paragraph 1 hereof.

  2. That liberty be reserved to either party to apply for any order consequent upon these orders.

IT IS CERTIFIED THAT

  1. Pursuant to Rule 19.50 of the Family Law Rules 2004 this matter reasonably required the attendance of counsel including senior counsel.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: MLC 9056  of 2009

Mr Vaughan

Applicant

And

Ms Bele

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. Jurisdiction was conferred on this Court to determine property disputes arising from the breakdown of de facto relationships.  (See Family Law Amendment (De Facto Financial Matters and Other Measures) Act 2008 (Cth)).

  2. Subject to some geographical considerations which are not relevant here, that jurisdiction can only arise if the Court accepts that the parties were in a de facto relationship and that they were so when the legislation commenced on 1 March 2009.

Jurisdictional issue

  1. The question of whether or not the de facto relationship of the parties had come to an end before or after 1 March 2009 is a jurisdictional fact.  For the Court to have any power to make any orders, a de facto relationship must be found to have existed and to have…

Continue reading Vaughan & Bele

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Vaughan & Bele [2011] FamCA 436
Case
[2011] FamCA 436
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Vaughan & Bele*, Cronin J of the Family Court of Australia was required to determine whether a de facto relationship existed between the applicant and the respondent and, if so, when that relationship concluded. The dispute concerned the legal characterisation of the parties' association and its termination date, which would have implications for subsequent proceedings concerning final property orders.

The central legal issue before the Court was the existence and duration of a de facto relationship, as defined by the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This determination was a prerequisite for the Court to exercise its jurisdiction to make property adjustment orders under the Act. The Court needed to assess the evidence presented by the parties against the statutory criteria for establishing a de facto relationship.

Cronin J declared that a de facto relationship did exist between the applicant and the respondent, and that this relationship terminated on 2 March 2009. This declaration was made pursuant to sections 90RD and 4AA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Following this declaration, the Court ordered that all outstanding applications for final orders be referred to the Registrar for allocation of a hearing date, to proceed in accordance with the established de facto relationship. Liberty was reserved for either party to apply for further orders consequent upon this decision. The Court also certified that the matter reasonably required the attendance of counsel, including senior counsel, pursuant to Rule 19.50 of the *Family Law Rules 2004*.

Orders

Orders of the court

IT IS DECLARED THAT

1.

Pursuant to sections 90RD and 4AA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) a de facto relationship existed between the applicant and the respondent and that it came to an end on 2 March 2009.

IT IS ORDERED THAT

2.

That all extant applications for final orders be otherwise referred to the Registrar to await the allocation of a hearing in accordance with the declaration referred to in paragraph 1 hereof.

3.

That liberty be reserved to either party to apply for any order consequent upon these orders.

IT IS CERTIFIED THAT

4.

Pursuant to Rule 19.50 of the Family Law Rules 2004 this matter reasonably required the attendance of counsel including senior counsel.

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.