Case of Burton & Churchin & Anor [2013] FamCAFC 180 (15 November 2013) Section 60CC(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 provides that in considering what are in a child’s best interests, the court must consider the benefit of the child having

Case of Anderson & McIntosh [2013] FamCAFC 200 (13 December 2013) Section 44(3) of the Family Law Act 1975 provides that proceedings for the distribution of matrimonial property cannot be heard if the parties have been divorced for more than 12 months, without leave

Case of Wentworth v Wentworth [2013] FCCA 2043 (11 December 2013) As a result of the father making tentative arrangements to offer his twin children casual full-time employment, Judge Monahan in this case varied the adult child maintenance paid to enable the

Case of Adame & Adame [2014] FCCA 42 (16 January 2014) In this case, the wife sought to have a financial agreement for the distribution of the parties’ matrimonial property set aside, for a number of reasons including: – (a) while the

Case of Ledarn & Ledarn [2013] FamCA 858 (1 November 2013) There was a breakdown of a 29 year old marriage. The Court had to deal with a dispute over which party should keep the family business (a large manufacturer of car

Case of Doherty [2014] FamCAFC 20 (19 February 2014) In this case, the Full Court of the Family Court dismissed the father’s appeal against an order made by Demack FM as to parental responsibility which was made “sole” as to some issues

Case of Bevan [2014] FamCAFC 19 (19 February 2014) According to the the Full Court of the Family Court: “The primary issue [was] whether [the trial judge] erred in concluding it was just and equitable to alter existing property interests when the parties

Case of Meyer & Shipton (No. 2) [2013] FCCA 2198 (19 December 2013) There had been a consent order in place for the parties’ son for three years, providing the parties’ for equal access, despite the parties living approximately one hour’s drive

Marsh v Marsh  [2014] FamCAFC 24 (25 February 2014) The Full Court of the Family Court llowed the wife’s appeal against an earlier property order, The case involved a 21 year marriage with three children. where the parties had been

Vadisanis & Vadisanis and Anor [2014]FamCAFC97 -12/6/2014 The case was an appeal by the wife against the property orders made at trial by Fowler J. The question of whether the “intervener” (the mother of the husband “V”)  had the benefit of