ByLawyers News and Updates
  • Publication updates
    • Federal
    • New South Wales
    • Victoria
    • Queensland
    • South Australia
    • Western Australia
    • Northern Territory
    • Tasmania
    • Australian Capital Territory
  • By area of law
    • Bankruptcy and Liquidation
    • Business and Franchise
    • Companies, Trusts, Partnerships and Superannuation
    • Conveyancing and Property
    • Criminal Law
    • Defamation and Protecting Reputation
    • Employment Law
    • Family Law
    • Immigration
    • Litigation
    • Neighbourhood Disputes
    • Personal injury
    • Personal Property Securities
    • Practice Management
    • Security of Payments
    • Trade Marks
    • Wills and Estates
  • Legal alerts
  • Articles
  • By Lawyers

Family law cases – FED

15 March 2021 by By Lawyers

A number of recent family law cases have been added to 101 Family Law Answers.

These new family law cases are located in the following sections of this helpful reference manual:

Costs orders

For a discussion of interim lump sum payments see Russo and Russo & Ors [2020] FCWA 182 at [61]-[66].

Settlement offers

In Paradin & Paradin [2020] FamCAFC 245 an order that the husband pay the wife’s costs was set aside. The husband had rejected the wife’s Calderbank offer because it was ambiguous and was not specific as to breakdown of payments. Strickland J stated at [57]:

… I am reminded … of what the Full Court said in Pennisi, namely, it is critical to consider the context in which an offer is made … And, as was said by the Full Court in Cross & Beaumont [2008] FamCAFC 68 … at [51] that context can be that ‘[i]f the recipient of the offer is demonstrably unable to comply with his or her obligations under the proposed settlement, it is difficult to see how the offer could be relied upon in support of an application for costs’.

Contributions – Conduct and family violence

Benson & Drury [2020] FamCAFC 303 saw the Full Court dismiss an appeal by the de facto husband against a 5% adjustment in the de facto wife’s favour. The adjustment had been made due to the impact of family violence upon her contributions, based on the arguments raised in Kennon. However, the Full Court stated that the primary judge was in error for not considering the Kennon argument in a holistic way. At [35] they stated:

…The contributions which have been made significantly more arduous have to be weighed along with all other contributions by each of the parties, whether financial or non-financial, direct or indirect to the acquisition, conservation and improvement of property and in the role of homemaker and parent. All contributions must be weighed collectively and so it is an error to segment or compartmentalise the various contributions and weigh one against the remainder.

101 Family Law Answers is available as a related guide and also in the reference materials folder in all By Lawyers Family Law publications. It provides more detailed information and relevant family law cases. It is separated into the various Family Law matter types – Property Settlement, Children, Financial Agreements and Divorce. It also covers general procedural issues and the enforcement of orders.

Filed Under: Australian Capital Territory, Family Law, Federal, Legal Alerts, New South Wales, Northern Territory, Publication Updates, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria, Western Australia Tagged With: costs orders, family law

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required
Preferred State

Connect with us

  • Email
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

Copyright © 2025 · Privacy Policy
Created and hosted by LEAP · Log in