Featured Quizzes
User Quizzes
Create Quiz
Data and Charts
Word Search
Flash Cards
Badges and Games
About JetPunk
Message Board
Random Quiz
Dark Mode
Family Law: Financial Provision on Marriage - Statistics
General Stats
-
This quiz has been taken 2 times
0 since last reset
- The average score is 0 of 56
Answer Stats
| Hint | Answer | % Correct |
|---|---|---|
| s.25(2)(d) | Age and length of marriage | 0%
|
| Attachment | 0%
| |
| Autonomy | 0%
| |
| Standard of living actually enjoyed DURING marriage (case) | BD v FD | 0%
|
| Husband lied about actual income, is what is reasonably foreseeable that is considered (case) | Boker Ingram | 0%
|
| Other types of property adjustment order (as below) | Both retain interest under trust/charge | 0%
|
| Once died will be accounted for, but can be condensed (case) | B v B 2008 | 0%
|
| First consideration | Child welfare | 0%
|
| Order used to cut all financial ties (except child maintenance) with spouse | Clean break | 0%
|
| Compensation | 0%
| |
| s.25(2)(g) | Conduct that would be inequitable to disregard | 0%
|
| s.25(2)(f) | Contributions to welfare of family (childcare, housekeeping etc.) | 0%
|
| Where pre-marital cohabitation that leaves seamlessly into marriage will be matrimonial property(case) | CO v CO 2004 | 0%
|
| Stellar contribution case | Cowan v Cowan | 0%
|
| s.25(2)(e) | Disabilities | 0%
|
| Equal sharing | 0%
| |
| s.25(2)(b) | Financial needs | 0%
|
| Wealthy husband mostly inherited, less than half of assets were not matrimonial property | Hart v Hart | 0%
|
| Attempted murder was determined to be conduct | H v H 2005 | 0%
|
| s.25(2)(a) | Income, earning capacity, and other financial resources of each party | 0%
|
| Earning capacity is not an asset | Jones v Jones | 0%
|
| Brought high value shares to marriage but kept them separate , non-marital asset | K v L | 0%
|
| Stellar contribution requires a seed of genius | Lambert v Lambert | 0%
|
| Order where one party is to pay specified amount of money in one (or instalments) | Lump sum | 0%
|
| Prostitutes and cocaine not conduct as wife should take husband as she found him | MAP v MFP | 0%
|
| Allows one spouse to live in house for rest of life until death, remarriage, or cohabitation | Martin | 0%
|
| Main statute | Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 | 0%
|
| Case | Matthews v Matthews | 0%
|
| Compensation principle, wife gave up career to look after home | McFarlane v McFarlane | 0%
|
| Order that defers sale until a triggering event occurs | Mesher | 0%
|
| Straightforward division of assets in a dual income marriage | Miller v Miller | 0%
|
| Stellar contribution must be gross and obvious, inequitable to ignore | Miller v Miller | 0%
|
| Common law principles | Needs | 0%
|
| Is there a presumption in favour of making the order | No | 0%
|
| s.25(2)(h) | No widows pension on divorce | 0%
|
| Off-setting | 0%
| |
| Order where one party has to pay money over certain period of time? | Periodical payments | 0%
|
| Order where home is sold | Power of sale | 0%
|
| Section | s.23(1) | 0%
|
| Section | s.23(1)(c) | 0%
|
| Section | s.24 | 0%
|
| Section | s.24A | 0%
|
| Section for statutory factors/checklist | s.25(2) | 0%
|
| Section | s.25A(1) | 0%
|
| Pension sharing types | Sharing | 0%
|
| - Kept finances separate
- Wife earned more through bonuses
- Different earnings and shortness of marriage so shouldn’t be divided equally | Sharp v Sharp | 0%
|
| Wife awarded 54k, committed suicide later, husband sought to have award reversed, court said no as was not just wife's money, however reduced entitlement | Smith v Smith 1991 | 0%
|
| s.25(2)(c) | Standard of living | 0%
|
| Source of the asset that matters, transferred 80 mil into wife's name | Standish v Standish | 0%
|
| Case that said it is only first NOT overriding consideration (case) | Suter v Suter and Jones | 0%
|
| Stellar contribution must induce a gulp not a gasp | S v S 2006 | 0%
|
| Wife going to inherit, court does not take into account what has not yet been inherited (case) | S v S 2007 | 0%
|
| One party transfers share/ownership over to other spouse | Transfer of property | 0%
|
| Conduct must be gross to be taken into account | Wachtel v Wachtel 1973 | 0%
|
| Yardstick of equality, non-financial contributions are just as valuable to avoid discrimination of homemaker | White v white 2000 | 0%
|
| Concept of non-matrimonial property (case) | White v White 2000 | 0%
|
No matching quizzes found
Score Distribution
Percent of People with Each Score
Percentile by Number Answered
Your Score History
You have not taken this quiz since the last reset
New and Popular