High Court of Australia
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
FRENCH CJ, HAYNE, HEYDON, KIEFEL AND BELL JJ
STANFORD APPELLANT
AND
STANFORD RESPONDENT
Stanford v Stanford [2012] HCA 52 15 November 2012 P23/2012
ORDER
1. Appeal allowed with costs.
2. Set aside paragraphs 1 and 2 of the orders of the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia made on 19 January 2012.
3. Vary the orders of the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia made on 21 October 2011 by adding a paragraph dismissing the Form 1 Application for Final Orders filed on behalf of the respondent by her case guardian in the Family Court of Western Australia on 17 August 2009.
On appeal from the Family Court of Australia
Representation
P M Dowding SC with P W Johnston and J R Brady for the appellant (instructed by Carr & Co)
M R Berry with G Athanasiou for the respondent (instructed by Ferrier, Athanasiou & Kakulas)
Interveners
P J Hanks QC with R L Hooker and D M Forrester intervening on behalf of the Attorney-General of the Commonwealth (instructed by Australian Government Solicitor)
G R Donaldson SC, Solicitor-General for the State of Western Australia with F B Seaward intervening on behalf of the Attorney-General for the State of Western Australia (instructed by State Solicitor (WA))
J G Renwick SC with S Robertson intervening on behalf of the Attorney-General for the State of New South Wales (instructed by Crown Solicitor (NSW))
Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.
CATCHWORDS
Stanford v Stanford
Family law – Family Court – Jurisdiction – Proceedings to alter property interests – Husband and wife lived apart after wife admitted into full time residential care – Husband continued to live in matrimonial home and provide financially for wife's care – Husband and wife had separate wills in favour of their children from earlier marriages – Wife by case guardian applied for order altering interests in marital property between husband and wife – Wife died before Full Court of Family Court delivered judgment and daughters continued proceeding as wife's legal personal representatives – Whether "matrimonial cause" within definition of Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Whether there was power to make property settlement order.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate