October 8th 2005


  Buy Issue 2717
Qty:

Articles from this issue:

COVER STORY: THE WAR ON TERROR: Identifying and tackling the causes of terrorism

EDITORIAL: Ethanol back on the national agenda

NATIONAL SECURITY: 800 potential terrorists in Australia

CANBERRA OBSERVED: Can Labor ignore Latham's message?

QUARANTINE: Federal Court overturns pig meat import ban

EUROPE: France pays mothers to have more children

DIVORCE LAWS: Fathers turning against Howard

FAMILY: Parental duty of care fails adolescents

EDUCATION: University students struggling with English

SCHOOLS: Primary schools performing poorly

STRAWS IN THE WIND: Germany and the hazards of proportional representation / Minefield Childcare and its critics / Latham diaries fall-out / State-federal jousting

HIV/AIDS EPIDEMIC: Using common sense, not condom sense

OPINION: Why Latham's Labor lost

POPULATION: Communist China's abuse of pregnant women

Real face of Labor (letter)

Legal redress for paternity fraud (letter)

Elite media's hatred of Bush (letter)

BOOKS: THE COLLAPSE OF GLOBALISM: and the Reinvention of the World, by John Ralston Saul

BOOKS: UNDER THE LOVING CARE OF THE FATHERLY LEADER: North Korea and the Kim Dynasty

Books promotion page
FONT SIZE:

Legal redress for paternity fraud (letter)


by Craig W. Saunders

News Weekly, October 8, 2005
Sir,

We refer to "Paternity fraud penalises the innocent" by Babette Francis in News Weekly (August 13, 2005).

All reasonable readers of your magazine would appreciate that the situation caused by the wife was appalling.

We have recently been advised that the Family Law Amendment Act 2005 Commonwealth, being number 98 of 2005, introduces changes to the Family Law Act 1975 Commonwealth which, amongst other things, allows for the recovery of child maintenance paid by a person found not to be a parent and improves the existing parenting compliance situation.

We have consulted the new legislation.

From August 3 this year, if paternity is disproved in a matter in the Family Law Court of Australia, the new section 66X of the Family Law Act can be used by the wrongly paying parent to obtain orders for the reimbursement of the money or property that he had been paid or had been paying from the parent who should have been paying it in the first place.

As we understand the law, appeals could always be made to the Family Court from child support assessments of the Child Support Agency where paternity has been disputed.

It seems that the Federal Parliament has taken the necessary steps to redress the type of injustice faced by Mr Liam McGill.

Craig W. Saunders,
Saunders and Standen Solicitors and Attorneys,
Riverstone, NSW




























Join email list

Join e-newsletter list


Your cart has 0 items



Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers



Trending articles

EDITORIAL The future of Senator Cory Bernardi

EDITORIAL Trump installed but the left refuses to accept it

COVER STORY Company tax proposal just made for Trump

EDITORIAL Nothing new among Trump's executive orders

EUTHANASIA Quebec, Dutch, Belgian and Oregon laws a 'mess'

QUEENSLAND Pro-life Brisbane marches as abortion vote nears

COVER STORY Don't grieve dumped TPP; rather, thank Trump



News and views from around the world



























© Copyright NewsWeekly.com.au 2011
Last Modified:
December 2, 2016, 2:36 pm