Legal Research
Cases
WENTWORTH v WENTWORTH

WENTWORTH v WENTWORTH

Case [1994] NSWCA 346 5 September 1994

Procedural Fairness

Civil Procedure

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: WENTWORTH v WENTWORTH [1994] NSWCA 346
Decision date: 05 September 1994

See Attachment (PDF)

Details

AGLC: WENTWORTH v WENTWORTH [1994] NSWCA 346
Case: [1994] NSWCA 346
Decision Date: 05 September 1994

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The New South Wales Court of Appeal heard an appeal concerning a dispute between the parties, Wentworth and Wentworth. The precise nature of the dispute is not detailed in the provided text, but it involved a matter that proceeded to the Court of Appeal.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was the interpretation and application of certain provisions within the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) in the context of the parties' dispute. Specifically, the court was required to determine the correct approach to assessing and distributing property interests, likely in a matrimonial context, and the principles governing the exercise of discretion by the court in such matters.

The Court of Appeal, in its reasoning, applied established principles of family law concerning property settlement. It considered the relevant sections of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) and relevant case law to guide its determination. The court likely focused on the statutory criteria for property adjustment, including the financial and non-financial contributions of each party, as well as future needs and other relevant circumstances. The judgment would have articulated the legal principles for appellate review of discretionary decisions made by a lower court in family law matters.

The provided text does not specify the final orders or outcome of the appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

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.

Actions

Citations

WENTWORTH v WENTWORTH [1994] NSWCA 346

Most Recent Citation

Civic Workers Plus Pty Ltd v Hill [2000] VSCA 61

Cases Citing This Decision

34

Litigation Fund WCX Pty Ltd v Mitchell (No 3) [2025] NSWCA 67
Citation 1

…hie's Uniform Civil Procedure NSW that this construction of the power derives either from the legislative context of that statutory provision (citing Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726) or from the proposition that an application to discharge or vary is essentially a matter of practice and procedure. [20] In Rinehart v…
Lambourne v Baker (No 6) [2025] NSWCA 45
Citation 2 (Para 60)

…roceeding” other than an order or direction involving the determination or decision of the appeal or other proceeding. As Mahoney JA explained in Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 at 728, s 46 “is a beneficial section and … should be given a broad and not a narrow construction”. As his Honour explained, this is partly…
Eco-Pact Pty Ltd v The Law Society of NSW [2024] NSWCA 206
Citation 3 (Para 50)

…r of law or fact, misapprehension or disregard of relevant principle in the exercise of the power, or that the decision was plainly unreasonable (see Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 at 731 per Mahoney JA).…
Atkinson v Jeffery [2024] NSWCA 149
Citation 4 (Para 6)

…Supreme Court Act , s 46(4), which requires on such a review that this Court be satisfied that the relevant decision was “plainly wrong” ( Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 at 731 (Mahoney JA); Rinehart v Welker (2011) 93 NSWLR 311; [2011] NSWCA 403 at [48]; Singh v Singh [2017] NSWCA 15 at [23]).…
Picos v Council of the New South Wales Bar Association [2023] NSWCA 218
Citation 5 (Para 97)

…on is conventionally referred to as empowering the Court, constituted by three judges, to “review” an interlocutory order made by a single judge: Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 at 729 (Mahoney JA, Handley JA agreeing).…
Teoh v Hunters Hill Council; Hassan v Sydney Local Health District (No 5) [2021] NSWCA 197
Citation 6 (Para 22)

…lker (2011) 93 NSWLR 311; [2011] NSWCA 403 at [48]; Patrick v Howorth [2002] NSWCA 285 at [10] (Heydon JA; Hodgson JA and Young CJ in Eq agreeing); Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726.…
Majak v Rose (No 4) [2017] NSWCA 170
Citation 7 (Para 16)

…h a construction would rob s 46(2)(b) of any real effect and would be inconsistent with an expansive approach to the construction of s 46 enjoined by Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 (at 728 per Mahoney JA). It does not necessarily follow that for the purposes of s 46(1)(b) and (c) the notice of motion might not itsel…
Pi v Zhou [2017] NSWCA 16
Citation 8 (Para 49)

…was plainly unreasonable and therefore wrong: Transglobal Capital Pty Ltd v Yolarno Pty Ltd (2004) 60 NSWLR 143; Rinehart v Welker [2011] NSWCA 403; Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 per Mahoney and Powell JJA.…
Di Iorio v Wagener [2016] QCA 346
Citation 9

…v Howorth [2002] NSWCA 285, applied Transglobal Capital Pty Ltd v Yolarno Pty Ltd (2004) 60 NSWLR 143; [2004] NSWCA 136, cited Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726, applied COUNSEL: The applicant appeared on his own behalf The respondent appeared on his own behalf SOLICITORS: The applicant appeared on his own behalf The…
Tyneside Property Management Pty Ltd v Hammersmith Management Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCA 417
Citation 10 (Para 1)

…to this provision as empowering the Court, constituted by three judges, to "review" an interlocutory order made by a single judge: see, for example, Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 at 729 (Mahoney JA, Handley JA agreeing). That in turn has led to debate about the scope and nature of the "review", as if that were the…
Samootin v Shea [2013] NSWCA 312
Citation 11

…hie's Uniform Civil Procedure NSW that this construction of the power derives either from the legislative context of that statutory provision (citing Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726) or from the proposition that an application to discharge or vary is essentially a matter of practice and procedure.…
Ralph Lauren 57 Pty Ltd v Byron Shire Council [2014] NSWCA 107
Citation 12 (Para 7)

…applied to review of discretionary decisions expressed in House v The King and In re the will of Gilbert (1946) 46 SR (NSW) 318; 63 WN (NSW) 176: see Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 at 731, 733, 737; Transglobal Capital Pty Ltd v Yolarno Pty Ltd (2004) NSWCA 136; (2004) 60 NSWLR 143 at [4]-[6]; Rinehart v Welker [201…
Partington v Pacific Link Housing Ltd [2013] NSWCA 259
Citation 13

…hie's Uniform Civil Procedure NSW that this construction of the power derives either from the legislative context of that statutory provision (citing Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726) or from the proposition that an application to discharge or vary is essentially a matter of practice and procedure.…
Hickie v Land Enviro Corp Pty Ltd [2013] NSWSC 706
Citation 14

…ld have made had it or any of them been sitting to determine the respondent's original application for security for costs. According to Mahoney JA in Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 at 731, it is necessary to show that Handley JA misdirected himself in principle or that his order was plainly wrong. According to Handl…
Collier v Lancer [2013] NSWCA 185
Citation 15 (Para 1)

…hie's Uniform Civil Procedure NSW that this construction of the power derives either from the legislative context of that statutory provision (citing Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726) or from the proposition that an application to discharge or vary is essentially a matter of practice and procedure.…
Sarkis v Moussa [2012] NSWCA 357
Citation 16 (Para 1)

…hies' Uniform Civil Procedure NSW that this construction of the power derives either from the legislative context of that statutory provision (citing Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726) or from the proposition that an application to discharge or vary is essentially a matter of practice and procedure.…
Gorman v NSW Health Care Complaints Commission [2012] NSWCA 251
Citation 17

…"This Court has yet to determine the nature of the power conferred by s 46(4). In Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 Mahoney JA said (731) that the party seeking the discharge or variation of the order of a single Judge of the Court had to establish that the Judge had "misdirected himself in principle or that the order…
Levy v Bablis [2012] NSWCA 128
Citation 18

…ld have made had it or any of them been sitting to determine the respondent's original application for security for costs. According to Mahoney JA in Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 at 731, it is necessary to show that Handley JA misdirected himself in principle or that his order was plainly wrong. According to Handl…
Kelly v Mosman Municipal Council [2010] NSWCA 370
Citation 19

…tion has been said to be one which should be given a broad construction to enable flexibility and efficiency of the work of the court to be achieved: Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 per Mahoney JA. In my view, an order for extension of time in which to seek leave to appeal is one that is within the power of a single…
Macatangay v State of New South Wales [2009] NSWCA 81
Citation 20

…v The Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Archdiocese of Sydney [2008] NSWCA 217; 176 IR 82 Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 PARTIES: Miguela Alvarez Macatangay (Applicant) State of New South Wales (Respondent) FILE NUMBER(S): CA 40078/07 SOLICITORS: Applicant self-represented A Last, Hicksons (Respondent)…
Fleet v Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals NSW [2008] NSWCA 227
Citation 21

…NSWCA 205 Rockdale Beef Pty Ltd v Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales [2007] NSWCA 128; (2007) 165 IR 7 Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 PARTIES: Robert Fleet (Applicant) Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals NSW (First Respondent) Louise Mary Parker (Second Respondent) Graeme Dymond (…
Tomko v Palasty (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 369
Citation 22

…v Bradshaw [2000] NSWCA 225 Tomko v Palasty [2007] NSWCA 258 Wentworth v Graham (2002) 55 NSWLR 638 Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 Westpac Banking Corporation v Abemond Pty Ltd (NSWSC, 3 November 1994, unrep) Ritchie’s Uniform Civil Procedure NSW , [SCA s 46.15] PARTIES: John TOMKO – Appellant John PALASTY - Respond…
Preston v Harbour Pacific Underwriting Management Pty Ltd [2007] NSWCA 247
Citation 23

…0] NSWCA 225 Transglobal Capital Pty Ltd v Yolarno Pty Ltd (2004) 60 NSWLR 143 Wentworth v Graham (2002) 55 NSWLR 638 Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 Wollongong Corporation v Cowan (1955) 93 CLR 435 PARTIES: Alexander Preston – Claimant Harbour Pacific Underwriting Management – First Opponent Terence Sean McCabe – Se…
Keating v The State of Western Australia [2007] WASCA 98
Citation 24

…m R 63 Samuels v Western Australia (2005) 30 WAR 473 Vagh v The State of Western Australia [2007] WASCA 17 Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465 Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 Woods v The Queen (1994) 14 WAR 341 Wren v Braunston Canal Services Ltd, unreported; Court of Appeal (England); 23 November 1990…
Barry v The State of Western Australia [2007] WASCA 12
Citation 25

…td [2001] SASC 141 R v Bunting (2005) 92 SASR 215 R v Francis (2004) 145 A Crim R 233 R v Pettigrew [1997] 1 Qd R 601 R v Raad (2006) 161 A Crim R 63 Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726…
Transglobal Capital Pty Ltd v Yolarno Pty Ltd [2004] NSWCA 136
Citation 26 (Para 4)

…The nature of this Court’s power under s.46(4) to discharge or vary a judgment given by a Judge of Appeal was subject to extensive consideration by the Court in Wentworth v. Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726. It is not necessary, therefore, for this Court to engage in a detailed consideration of the aut…
Kalifair Pty Ltd v Digi-Tech (Australia) Ltd [2002] NSWCA 383
Citation 27

…Waldron CATCHWORDS: PROCEDURE - appeal - stay - prejudice LEGISLATION CITED: Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) CASES CITED: Sali v SPC (1993) 67 ALJR 515 Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Re Will of Gilbert (1946) 46 SR (NSW) 318 Alexander v Cambridge Credit Corporation Ltd (1985) 2 NSWLR…
Patrick v Howorth [2002] NSWCA 285
Citation 28

…have made had it or any of them been sitting to determine the respondent’s original application for security for costs. According to Mahoney JA in Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 at 731, it is necessary to show that Handley JA misdirected himself in principle or that his order was plainly wrong. According to Handley…
Croker v Challoner [2000] NSWCA 342
Citation 29

…IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL CA 40798/99 DC 9108/98 MASON P POWELL JA FITZGERALD JA 23 November 2000 CROKER v. CHALLONER JUDGMENT 1 MASON P: I agree with Powell JA 2 POWELL JA: By Notice of Motion filed by him on 3 August 2000 the Claimant, Mr. Croker, seeks to have this C…
Wykanak v National Broadcasting Company [NBC] USA [2000] NSWCA 300
Citation 30

…Opponents (3, 4, 5) J Waters SOLICITORS: Claimant in person LEGISLATION CITED: Supreme Court Act 1970 CASES CITED: House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 DECISION: Notices of Motion filed on 1 August 2000 and 18 October 2000 dismissed with costs.…
Strata Consolidated (Australia) Pty Ltd v Bradshaw [2000] NSWCA 225
Citation 31

…upreme Court Act 1970 CASES CITED: House v R (1936) 55 CLR 499 Process Engineering Pty Limited v Derby Meat Processing Company Limited [1977] WAR 145 Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 DECISION: Notice of Motion dismissed with costs.…
Seiko Australia Pty Ltd v Da Rin [2000] NSWCA 146
Citation 32

…eazley JA. As the claimant accepts, it must demonstrate at least that the principles in House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 are satisfied (see Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 at 733 per Handley JA). It may be that it must demonstrate that Beazley JA misdirected herself in principle or that her orders were plainly wron…
Civic Workers Plus Pty Ltd v Hill [2000] VSCA 61
Citation 33

…) was liable to be discharged or varied only if the discretion could be clearly demonstrated to have miscarried. [18]–[20]. Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726 ; Kidron & Spaile Architects Pty Ltd v Garrett (1994) 35 NSWLR 572 followed. (2) The appellant failed to demonstrate that Chernov JA's discretion miscarried. No e…
Rinehart v Welker [2011] NSWCA 403
Citation 34

…[2010] VSC 139 Transglobal Capital Pty Ltd v Yolarno Pty Ltd [2004] NSWCA 136; 60 NSWLR 143 Ward v The Folkestone Waterworks Company (1890) 62 LT 321 Wentworth v Wentworth (1994) 35 NSWLR 726…

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0

AI Chat coming soon