NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION: Hayes v Marquis [2008] NSWCA 10 This decision has been amended. Please see the end of the judgment for a list of the amendments.
HEARING DATE(S): 16 May 2007
JUDGMENT DATE: 22 February 2008
JUDGMENT OF: Beazley JA at 1; McColl JA at 19; Einstein J at 151
DECISION: 1 Appeal allowed. 2. Set aside the verdict in favour of the respondent in the sum of $120,000. 3. Order that there be judgment for the respondent in the sum of $100,000. 4. Order that each party pay his and her own costs of the appeal.
CATCHWORDS: FAMILY LAW AND CHILD WELFARE – Property (Relationships) Act 1984 – s 5(1)(b) – whether parties in a "close personal relationship" where not living continuously in the same house – whether "personal care" in s 5(1)(b) includes emotional support – relevance to determination of relationship of non-disclosure of cohabitation to government authorities – adjustment of property interests – failure to take into account part of appellant's assets – obligation of parties to property relationship proceedings to make full and frank disclosure of relevant financial circumstances.
Civil Procedure Act 2005 De Facto Relationships Act 1984 LEGISLATION CITED: Family Provision Act 1982 Property (Relationships) Act 1984 Property (Relationships) Legislation Amendment Act 1999 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
Armory v Delamirie (1722) 1 Stra 505; (1722) 93 ER 664 Bar-Mordecai v Hillston [2004] NSWCA 65 Barnes v De Jesus [2001] NSWSC 19 Bilous v Mudaliar [2006] NSWCA 38 Black v Black (1991) 15 Fam LR 109 Burden v Cottee (Supreme Court of New South Wales, Bryson J, 31 July 1998, unreported) Chanter v Catts [2005] NSWCA 411; (2005) 64 NSWLR 360 Davey v Lee (1990) 13 Fam LR 688 Dridi v Fillmore [2001] NSWSC 319 Dunstan v Rickwood (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 266 Elite Protective Personnel Pty Ltd v Salmon (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 373 Fung v Ye [2007] NSWCA 115 Government Insurance Office of New South Wales v Rozniak (1992) 27 NSWLR 665 Greenwood v Merkel [2004] NSWSC 43 House v R [1936] HCA 40; (1936) 55 CLR 499 Howlett v Neilson [2005] NSWCA 149 Hughes v Egger [2005] NSWSC 18 James v Surf Road Nominees Pty Ltd (No 2) [2005] NSWCA 296 John Fairfax & Sons Ltd v Carson (1991) 24 NSWLR 259 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (1959) 101 CLR 298 Jones v Grech [2001] NSWCA 208; (2001) 27 Fam LR 711 CASES CITED: Kardos v Sarbutt [2006] NSWCA 11 Kardos v Sarbutt (No 2) [2006] NSWCA 206 Mcdonald v Stelzer [2000] NSWCA 302; (2001) 27 Fam LR 304 Manns v Kennedy [2007] NSWCA 217 Metropolitan Water Sewerage & Drainage Board v Histon [1982] 2 NSWLR 720 O'Brien v Tanning Research Laboratories Inc (1988) 14 NSWLR 601 Paino v Paino [2006] NSWSC 218 Petersen v Gregory [2007] NSWSC 8 PY v CY [2005] QCA 247 Re Fagan Deceased [1980] 5 Fam LR 813 Roy v Sturgeon (1986) 11 NSWLR 454 Saric v Steward [2006] NSWCA 260 Simonis v Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd (1987) 21 NSWLR 677 Skulander v Willoughby City Council [2007] NSWCA 116 Southgate v Waterford (1990) 21 NSWLR 427 Sullman v Sullman [2002] NSWSC 169 Tasmania v Victoria [1935] HCA 4; (1935) 52 CLR 157 Trustees of the Property of John Daniel Cummins v Cummins [2006] HCA 6; (2006) 80 ALJR 589 Weston v Public Trustee (1986) 4 NSWLR 407 White v White [2004] NSWSC 208 Wilson v Vine [2003] NSWSC 341 Ye v Fung [2006] NSWSC 243
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