The full court in McCoy & Chancellor [2014] FamCAFC  62 dismissed Ms Coy’s appeal from Judge Turner’s granting of leave to Ms Chancellor under s44 (6) to apply for property orders three months out of time.   The parties had been a de-facto relationship for a number of years..

The full court said at [37] :

“…the voluntary severance of the de facto relationship rendered the just and equitable requirement `readily satisfied ‘ in the language of the High Court . As is made clear by Stanford ([2012] HCA 52} it is not necessary to find that an order adjusting property interests will be made, for the just and equitable requirement to be satisfied.  Indeed [Stanford] allows for cases where the just and equitable requirement is fulfilled, but application of s 79(4) may result in no order being made adjusting the parties existing property interests”

Leave a Reply