• Home
  • Articles
    • Front Page
    • General Interest
    • Snippets
    • Letters to the Editor
    • Council Comments
  • Competitions
    • Sydney Royal Easter Show Giveaway
  • Our Community
    • Our People
    • Question of the Week
    • Jobs in the Central West
    • Be Seen
    • What’s On
    • What’s Hot
  • Features
    • Women in Business
    • Rural Round Up
    • My Place
    • Loving Local Living
    • Wellness Wise
    • Just a Short Drive
    • Real Estate
  • Sports
    • Bowls
    • Cricket
    • Equestrian
    • Footy Tips
    • Golf
    • Netball
    • Rugby League
    • Rugby Union
    • Soccer
    • Touch Football
  • Contact Us
    • Contact Page
    • Advertise with us
    • Testimonials
    • Submit an Article
    • Subscribe to the Forbes Phoenix

Forbes Phoenix

Home » Legal Eagle

Legal Eagle

January 19, 2017 By Maggi Barnard

Living Together On A “Genuine Domestic Basis”
The issue of whether a couple was living together on a genuine domestic basis was examined in a Queensland Supreme Court case. The facts can be briefly summarised as follows: The applicant and the respondent commenced a sexual relationship, and it was alleged that the applicant commenced to live with the respondent at her property. The respondent and her ex-husband owned a caravan park. The applicant was, after a time, employed to manage the caravan park. He usually slept at the caravan park for most of the week, but another employee
slept there on arranged nights. The applicant said that when he was not sleeping at the caravan park as part of his managerial duties, he stayed with the respondent.

The applicant claimed that he and the respondent lived together throughout the relationship. He returned to the home for dinner. He kept clothes at both locations. He claimed that the parties were in a de facto relationship. The respondent maintained that the applicant
moved out of her property when he was employed as the caravan park manager and moved into the manager’s accommodation at the park. She said that they had not had a common residence since then. She considered the relationship to be one of employer and employee, even though the parties continued to be friendly and intimate. The relationship ended. The applicant claimed a property adjustment in his favour as the parties had been in a de facto relationship. The Court agreed.

Relationships can be very interesting and de facto relationships can produce a lot of different outcomes depending on the circumstances. If you have any questions please contact us.

Filed Under: Articles, General Interest

Latest Print Editions

Click here to download the recent issue (336) of The Forbes Phoenix (1.4MB) – 20th May 2022 

STAY CONNECTED

The Forbes Phoenix would like to thank you, our Facebook friends, for your continued support and readership!

SEARCH THE PHOENIX

Recent Articles

  • AFL May 20, 2022
  • Croquet May 20, 2022
  • Forbes Squash Co-Hosts Successful State Tournament May 20, 2022
  • Giant Effort To Stage ‘Big The Musical’ May 20, 2022
  • Hot Air Balloon Ride Lifts Spirits Sky High May 20, 2022

CONTACT THE PHOENIX

Address
7/113-127 Rankin Street, Forbes NSW 2871

Editorial Phone – 0455 143 636
editor@forbesphoenix.com.au

Sales Phone – 0459 086 023
sales@forbesphoenix.com.au

View our Privacy Policy.
View our Conflict Resolution Process.
View our Ethics and Complaints Policy.
Want to advertise with us?
Information on our Community Promotions.

Submit an Article

We are always looking for new articles of interest to the local community.

Please feel free to submit an article for possible inclusion in a future issue.

To submit an article, click here to use our online article submission form.

Recieve the Phoenix via email

* indicates required

Copyright © 2022 · Website setup by WebSysMan