Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

The Law of Who Gets What When A Marriage Fails in Australia.

Authoritative Full Court guidelines discussed in Moore & Moore [2008] FamCA 32

The Law of Who Gets What When A Marriage Fails in Australia.

The attachment to this posting is an Authoritative Full Court guidelines discussed in:

This is a link to the detailed FCA judgement in PDF format on the FLWG.
Site Admin said
We used the FLWG local library copy as the Family Law Court link does not work
Since this is contained with a judgement it might be possible to draw upon it for the purposes of a case.
  • Comparative analysis of English and Australian approaches in discretionary decision-making
  • The development of the modern law of property division in Australia and overseas traced
  • The role and function of social values in discretionary decision-making considered
  • The meaning and practical content of the prevailing relevant concept of contribution in s 79(4) discussed
  • Wealth transferring principles identified
  • The partnership notion of marriage contrasted with the evaluative method of ascertaining quantum of entitlement
The  following link is the detailed material at Austlii web link Last Updated: 6 February 2008 (not the FCA site)

Last edit: by OneRingRules


What is done for you, let it be done, what you must do, be sure you do it, as the wise person does today that what the fool will do in three days - Buddha
Jadzia said
both those links are now duds Verdad, do you have them elsewhere?
I have edited the post, used the file which was in our library and edited the Austlii link


Site Director
I agree that this is not a Full Court decision. It is a well researched outline of the history of Australian Family Law. It contrasts British and Australian Family Law.

As it can be seen this judgement is an authoritive text within the judgement. After reading this judgement I feel that my understanding of the way judges view cases is enhanced.  Discretion and its application are covered in an understandable form. It also deals in detail with the 75(2) contributions of ahomemaker, regardless of the quality of that contribution.

The upload was created by printing out the judgement, scanning pages 4 to 104 into a pdf file so that the protection of the original judgement could be transcended, thus allowing copying and pasting. Not possible from the original protected version. As a research document there is value in this document in my mind. I shall try again to upload the document which failed on the original attempt.


What is done for you, let it be done, what you must do, be sure you do it, as the wise person does today that what the fool will do in three days - Buddha
Thanks ORR but now I get

"You do not have access to anywhere this attachment is displayed"

When you are swimming down a creek and an eel bites your cheek, that's a Moray.

The Law of Who Gets What When a Marraige Fails in Australia: Moore & Moore [2008]

Try this link to the paper on Austlii:

The Law of Who Gets What When a Marraige Fails in Australia

aka Moore & Moore [2008] FamCA 32 (25 January 2008)

or http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/FamCA/2008/32.html

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MOORE & MOORE [2008] FamCA 32

FAMILY LAW  PROPERTY - Second settlement proceedings between same parties with grown up children - Initial order by consent in 1994 distributing $538,000 pool 67% to wife and 33% to the husband set aside pursuant to s 79A(1A) and discretion re-exercised - Husband's application for s 78 declaration as to parties shares in former matrimonial home on trust principles declined - Husband alleged unequal overall contribution based on claims against wife of extravagant spending, lack of commitment to the family and the marriage, pre-occupation with extraneous interests and recreations - Wife counter argued "equality is equity" in 20 year marriage except in cases of gross unevenness of contribution or when demands of economic justice otherwise dictate - Comparative analysis of English and Australian approaches in discretionary decision-making - The development of the modern law of property division in Australia and overseas traced - The role and function of social values in discretionary decision-making considered - The meaning and practical content of the prevailing relevant concept of contribution in s 79(4) discussed - Wealth transferring principles identified - The partnership notion of marriage contrasted with the evaluative method of ascertaining quantum of entitlement  The need for authoritative Full Court guidelines discussed.

Download (RTF)
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets