Magill v Magill

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
JudgeGleeson CJ,Gummow,Kirby,Crennan JJ,Hayne J,Heydon J
Judgment Date09 November 2006
Neutral Citation2006-1109 HCA A,[2006] HCA 51
CourtHigh Court
Docket NumberM152/2005
Date09 November 2006
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
95 cases
  • MW v Director-General, Department of Community Services
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 28 Marzo 2008
    ...Registration Act 1995 (NZ), ss 53, 62A. 4 See, for example, Green v Green (1989) 17 NSWLR 343. 5 [2007] 2 AC 432 at 450–451 [45]. 6 (2006) 226 CLR 551 at 564 [24]; [2006] HCA 7 (1976) 134 CLR 495 at 548–549; [1976] HCA 23. 8 Statutory Rules 1986 No 85 as amended. 9 Reported as Wenceslas v ......
  • Martin v Norton Rose Fulbright Australia (No 11)
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 16 Noviembre 2020
    ...FCA 2177 Lunt v Victoria International Container Terminal Limited [2020] FCAFC 40 MacDougal v Mitchell [2015] NSWCA 389 Magill v Magill [2006] HCA 51; 226 CLR 551 Malec v JC Hutton Pty Ltd [1990] HCA 20; 169 CLR 638 Mariconte v Nobarani [2020] FCA 1485 Marks v GIO Australia Holdings Ltd [19......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 firm's commentaries
3 books & journal articles
  • Table of cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Law of Torts. Sixth Edition
    • 25 Junio 2020
    ...466 Maddex v Sigouin, 2014 BCCA 213 ...................................................................... 35 Magill v Magill, [2006] HCA 51 ......................................................................... 336 Maguire v Padt, 2014 ONSC 6099 ...............................................
  • Intentional Torts
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Law of Torts. Sixth Edition
    • 25 Junio 2020
    ...in the context of the province’s family law legislation. The issue was also discussed by the High Court of Australia in Magill v Magill , [2006] HCA 51. 238 See Klar & Jefferies, above note 8 at 804–5. 239 See J Irvine, “Annotation to Sevidal v Chopra ” (1987) 41 CCLT 181; and Klar & Jeffer......
  • Misattributed Paternity: Should There be a Right to Reimbursement of Maintenance Erroneously Paid?
    • South Africa
    • Stellenbosch Law Review No. , August 2019
    • 16 Agosto 2019
    ...“Pat ernity Testing: A Poor Test of Father hood” (2009) 31 J Soc Welfare Fam Law 407 407 See also the Austr alian case of Magill v Magill [2006] HCA 51 (9 November 20 06) and the English case in which Ge rard Bradbur y recovered maint enance payment s of £30,000 plus inter est paid over mor......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT