• Home
  • Articles
    • Front Page
    • General Interest
    • Snippets
    • Letters to the Editor
    • Council Comments
  • Special Interests
  • 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
  • Classifieds
  • Competitions
  • 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

Click here to download the recent issue (176) of The Forbes & Parkes Phoenix (1.6MB PDF) – 13th February 2026

SEARCH THE PHOENIX

STAY CONNECTED

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

Recent Articles

  • A $7.6 Million Boost For Forbes Future Water Security February 12, 2026
  • Mayoral Notes February 12, 2026
  • Snippets… February 12, 2026
  • Indigenous Storytellers Scholarship Returns February 12, 2026
  • Meet Indigenous Chef Mindy Woods At Forbes Crop Swap February 12, 2026

Phoenix Office 7/113-127 Rankin Street, Forbes NSW 2871

Editor 0432 337 278
editor@forbesphoenix.com.au

Sales 0432 337 278
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.

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.

Subscribe

* indicates required

Copyright © 2026 · Magazine Pro Theme On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Go to mobile version