By and -

Key decisions

  • Eden & Eden [2022] FedCFamC1A 178
  • Charisteas & Charisteas [2022] FedCFamC1A 160
  • Paviello & Paviello [2022] FedCFamC1F 592
  • Samad & Haider [2022] FedCFamC2F1256


De facto thresholds – judge’s denial of leave to proceed was ‘repugnant to’ prior consent order granting leave under s 44(6)

In Eden & Eden [2022] FedCFamC1A 178 (27 October 2022) Austin J, sitting in the appellate jurisdiction of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, considered a decision of Judge Morley, where a de facto wife’s initiating application for property orders was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

There was uncertainty about the final date of separation, but in April 2018 a judge granted leave to proceed pursuant to s 44(6) of the Act, based on the de facto husband’s admission that jurisdiction existed (at [10]-[12]).

Despite the grant of leave, Judge Morley found that if the relationship broke down prior to 1 March 2009, there was no jurisdiction to make any order other than dismissing the proceedings for lack of jurisdiction (at [17]).

You've reached the end of this article preview

There's more to read! Subscribe to LSJ today to access the rest of our updates, articles and multimedia content.

Subscribe to LSJ

Already an LSJ subscriber or Law Society member? Sign in to read the rest of the article.

Sign in to read more