VOLEN & BACKSTROM
Case
•
[2013] FamCA 40
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
VOLEN & BACKSTROM [2013] FamCA 40
[2013] FamCA 40
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Volen & Backstrom concerned an application for declarations regarding the existence and duration of a de facto relationship. The primary proceedings involved an application for orders under sections 90SE, 90SG, or 90SM of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), or a declaration under section 90SL. A claim was made that a de facto relationship existed between the applicant and another person.
The court was required to determine whether a de facto relationship existed between the parties for the purposes of the *Family Law Act 1975*. This involved considering the criteria set out in section 4AA of the Act, which defines a de facto relationship as one where persons are not legally married, not related by family, and have a relationship as a couple living together on a genuine domestic basis, having regard to all the circumstances. The court also needed to consider the threshold requirements for making orders or declarations under section 90SB, specifically whether the relationship lasted at least two years, or if there was a child of the relationship, or if substantial contributions were made and a failure to make an order would result in serious injustice, or if the relationship was registered.
In its reasoning, the court applied the principles established in section 4AA of the *Family Law Act 1975*. It noted that the determination of whether a de facto relationship exists is a question of fact, to be assessed by considering all the circumstances of the relationship, including but not limited to the duration, common residence, sexual relationship, financial dependence or interdependence, property acquisition, mutual commitment, registration of the relationship, care of children, and public reputation. The court emphasised that no single factor is determinative, and the weight given to each circumstance is a matter for the court's discretion. The court also had regard to section 90RD, which empowers the court to declare the existence or non-existence of a de facto relationship for the purposes of the primary proceedings.
The court was required to determine whether a de facto relationship existed between the parties for the purposes of the *Family Law Act 1975*. This involved considering the criteria set out in section 4AA of the Act, which defines a de facto relationship as one where persons are not legally married, not related by family, and have a relationship as a couple living together on a genuine domestic basis, having regard to all the circumstances. The court also needed to consider the threshold requirements for making orders or declarations under section 90SB, specifically whether the relationship lasted at least two years, or if there was a child of the relationship, or if substantial contributions were made and a failure to make an order would result in serious injustice, or if the relationship was registered.
In its reasoning, the court applied the principles established in section 4AA of the *Family Law Act 1975*. It noted that the determination of whether a de facto relationship exists is a question of fact, to be assessed by considering all the circumstances of the relationship, including but not limited to the duration, common residence, sexual relationship, financial dependence or interdependence, property acquisition, mutual commitment, registration of the relationship, care of children, and public reputation. The court emphasised that no single factor is determinative, and the weight given to each circumstance is a matter for the court's discretion. The court also had regard to section 90RD, which empowers the court to declare the existence or non-existence of a de facto relationship for the purposes of the primary proceedings.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Statutory Construction
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
VOLEN & BACKSTROM [2013] FamCA 40
Most Recent Citation
Dobson and Seabrook [2015] FCCA 1503
Cases Citing This Decision
3
WORTH & RILEY
[2017] FamCA 393
RUSSELL & ROVANIO
[2013] FamCA 1047
DOBSON & SEABROOK
[2015] FCCA 1503
Cases Cited
5
Statutory Material Cited
0
Ricci & Jones
[2011] FamCAFC 222
Clisbey & Vas
[2011] FamCA 611
Vaughan & Bele
[2011] FamCA 436