Comments on: O Mistress Mine!

By: Jayjee

Jayjee — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 10:12:38 +0000

I love the smell of freshly overturned precedent first thing in the morning.

By: onica

onica — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 04:18:02 +0000

In the case of Robson v Quajarro.
Luis’s twins born in 1997 or 1998 to Veronica have not been mentioned and his 6 3/4 year relationship with Deborah has hardly been mentioned. Neither has been included in any of the past or present proceedings.

By: skepticlawyer

skepticlawyer — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:34:48 +0000

Fascinating stuff, Marcellous — thanks for keeping us informed.

By: Legal Eagle

Legal Eagle — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:20:27 +0000

Thanks Marcellous – freshly overturned, no less!

By: marcellous

marcellous — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:00:35 +0000

The Court of Appeal has overturned Justice Windeyer's decision in Quijarro. See also the SMH, Sex, flies and probate.

By: pete m

pete m — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:55:12 +0000

I had a client who knew the 2 year law well. He would shack up with a lady (his place), and on their 18 month anniversary, dump her and force her out. He then moved on and found another willing lady. He was very wealthy and simply decided he was too old to have his wealth halved.

Bolt makes the point the law has bad consequences for the original family unit. There’s $100K now missing from that family’s assets.

To my mind, I am not sure either way. On the one hand the dirty bugger should be responsible for his / her actions. On the other hand, how can a partner, knowing the other person is married, ever establish a marriage like relationship, especially given bigamy is unlawful here. To me this is making an exception where none exists under the Marriage Act.

By: skepticlawyer

skepticlawyer — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:30:34 +0000

Caz, I hope you find that YouTube… because I now want to see it

By: Caz

Caz — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:18:55 +0000

L.E – there’s a very funny YouTube video that did the rounds a few years ago, engendered by the never ending ‘question’ of consensual sex – the proposed clauses were hilarious … read out as the couple canoodled, with increasing eagerness, before finally signing on before they could go any further.

Have just been trying to find it, alas, not having any luck. How is it I never think I’ll ever have need to keep the link to something like that? I really should know better by now.

By: Caz

Caz — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:09:10 +0000

Dave – may people no doubt die wishing they had different sex, better sex, or sex with pretty much anyone other than almost all of the people they did have sex with – but not less.

By: Legal Eagle

Legal Eagle — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 08:54:17 +0000

JG, I tend to think that (unless it’s harmful in some way or non-consensual) the state should keep out of people’s sexual activity. It’s a private matter.

Dave, agreed – I think sometimes people do things they regret (usually with “beer goggles” on). I don’t know how you’d contract for one night stands though, or friendships which occasionally went further. It might be a bit of a libido killer with a one night stand if you were to whip out your standard form contract…