← All Authorities
Australia

Stanford v Stanford

(2012) 247 CLR 108
JurisdictionAustralia
Year2012
Statusunclear

Key Principle

The HCA held that the court must first be satisfied that it is just and equitable to make a property order under s.79 of the Family Law Act 1975 before proceeding to assess contributions and consider future needs.

Area of Law

family

Related Cases

Masson v Parsons (2019) 266 CLR 554

A known sperm donor may be recognised as a legal parent under the Family Law Act 1975, overriding inconsistent State presumptions, with paramount consideration given to the best interests of the child.

Stanford v Stanford (Just and Equitable Threshold) [2012] HCA 52

A property settlement order under s.79 FLA may only be made if it is just and equitable to alter existing property interests, which must be determined as a threshold question.

MRR v GR (2010) 240 CLR 461

Considers Hague Convention defences of grave risk of harm and child's objections in international child abduction proceedings under Australian law.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Stanford v Stanford and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Stanford v Stanford