Not Just and Equitable

Recent Case Law – https://pinpoint.cch.com.au/document/legauUio3259140sl1159247621/grady-chilcott-2020-flc-93- 968

Not always is it simply a matter of “what’s yours is now mine” when it comes to a family law property settlement.

In the recent matter of Grady & Chilcott (2020) FLC 93-968, the Full Court dismissed the de-facto wife’s appeal against the trial judge’s decision not to alter the property interests between the parties, despite their relationship having been eight years in length and each having acquired properties in their own name during this period.

The Full Court found that it was not “just and equitable” to order the division of property between the separating couple on the basis that:

  • the de-facto wife had not made any financial contribution to the husband’s properties nor did she substantially contribute to the parties’ living expenses; and
  • the husband made substantial financial contributions to the relationship; and
  • despite the wife having made some non-financial contributions, it was discovered the wife had defrauded the husband.

The wife was ordered to pay $58,286 in compensation to the husband. She was further ordered to pay the husband’s costs of $18,506.94 on the basis she was wholly unsuccessful in her appeal.

Speak to Lotus Legal to discuss your rights and entitlements in the particular circumstances of your property settlement matter.

Share:

More Posts

harassment

First Anti-Harassment Case Heard By FWC

On 24 December 2021, the Fair Work Commission (FWC) handed down the first decision following its expanded anti-sexual harassment jurisdiction (as outlined in our November

Send Us A Message