| 作者 |
 澳洲刚推出二奶法，两年以上的二奶可以分财产；中国不断扩大的二奶队伍肯定要促成类似法律的颁布和实施，敬请口袋深的LM关注。 |
 |
韦小宝
头衔: 海归上校
声望: 院士
加入时间: 2006/09/23
文章: 984
海归分: 76007
|
|
|
作者：韦小宝 在 海归酒吧 发贴, 来自【海归网】 http://www.haiguinet.com
https://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25120270-5001021,00.html
New de facto laws mean cheats no longer prosper
Article from: The Sunday Telegraph
By Nick Leys
March 01, 2009 12:00am
NEW laws that start today leave cheating husbands open to divorce-style litigation from their mistresses, who can now claim income maintenance, property and even superannuation funds.
The Family Law Amendment (De Facto Financial Matters and Other Measures), dubbed the "mistress laws", were passed by the Senate last November.
Left vulnerable: One woman's story
The main ob<x>jective is to remove same-sex discrimination from the Family Court system, but they have left the door open for a raft of de facto relationship claims.
De facto laws unfair on wives, kids: Editorial
The laws declare that de facto couples who satisfy basic criteria - such as being in the relationship for at least two years - will be treated in the Family Court in the same way as a married couple. It also applies to same-sex couples.
The laws will change the way property is divided by enabling the court to consider the "future needs" of partners, as it does for married couples.
Men or women who have a second relationship outside a marriage are now liable to legal action in the Family Court should the second partner decide he or she deserves income support or a share of assets. This is particularly the case if a child is involved.
Currently in NSW there is no general right to such maintenance for those in de facto relationships who feel they have a right to financial support or assets.Major law firms have already been asked for advice on the new laws, from those involved in more than one relationship and long-term de facto couples, who now want to protect their property.
Senior Slater & Gordon family law solicitor Heather McKinnon said firms had now started fielding calls from people "who are a little bit worried".
"A number of firms in Sydney and Melbourne have had inquiries from clients who have had long-standing relationships with people in other cities, in which they have provided accommodation and a lifestyle totally without the knowledge of their married partner," she said.
"It is quite clear that, if either of the two, shall we say women, made an application to the court, the other would have to be notified.
"The law is catching up with the complexity of social relationships. There is now no such thing as a hidden mistress."
Because the laws apply to same-sex couples, married men with gxy lovers could potentially end up in the Family Court. The changes could come as a shock to those who feel they are protected by their married status when it comes to extramarital relationships.
The laws could potentially also run into conflict over deceased estates, where children are in dispute with children from other relationships. They will also render void many pre-nuptial agreements.
"Existing pre-nups may now no longer be worth the paper they are written on," Ms McKinnon said.
Sydney University law professor Patrick Parkinson wrote a submission arguing against the amendment when it was under consideration by the Senate.
He warned that the changes to the laws mean people are automatically treated as married.
"What you are saying is that, in terms of property separation, it comes down to 'for better or for worse, till death do us part': if you've made that commitment, fair enough. But young people live together for a variety of reasons, such as to save rent, and don't see themselves as taking responsibility for each other for the rest of their lives."
While protection of children was a motive for the laws, Professor Parkinson said, they will have an ongoing effect on those who have been divorced and want to keep their property separate in a second relationship.
A spokesman for the Attorney-General Robert McClelland said the law was subject to a strict definition of a de facto relationship.
"The Bill specifically states that to have a de facto relationship covered by the legislation a couple must be living together on a genuine domestic basis," he said.
"Moreover, with limited exceptions, that cohabitation must exist for two years. If a couple doesn't live together, don't have children, are not publicly known to be a couple, and don't share financial resources, it is highly unlikely they would be covered by these laws."
But Professor Parkinson questioned this.
"The Attorney-General says he has a tight definition of de facto relationships, but he doesn't. The law says you can be in two relationships simultaneously," he said.
"Take a situation where a wealthy man has a wife at home and another relationship he keeps in an apartment in Potts Point where he spends a few nights a week, telling the wife he is away on business.
"There is a high probability the court will see this as a de facto relationship. "It's a lawyer's paradise." [email protected]
作者：韦小宝 在 海归酒吧 发贴, 来自【海归网】 http://www.haiguinet.com
|
|
|
| 返回顶端 |
|
 |
|
-
 澳洲刚推出二奶法，两年以上的二奶可以分财产；中国不断扩大的二奶队伍肯定要促成类似法律的颁布和实施，敬请口袋深的LM关注。 -- 韦小宝 - (5337 Byte) 2009-3-13 周五, 19:46 (2090 reads)
|
|
|
|
您不能在本论坛发表新主题, 不能回复主题, 不能编辑自己的文章, 不能删除自己的文章, 不能发表投票, 您 不可以 发表活动帖子在本论坛, 不能添加附件可以下载文件, |
|
|
