Law: Magill V Magill Hca
Introduction:
Magill v Magill was an appeal to the High Court of Australia in the Tort of Deceit. There had been no precedence on the Tort of Deceit in terms of paternity fraud in Australian jurisdiction, and questions were raised regarding the imposition of law and legislation in a marital context and whether the tort of deceit extends beyond the commercial context. The appeal was unanimously dismissed, and the decision became legally binding in all other Australian courts.
Material Facts:
Liam and Meredith Magill married in April 1988 and separated in November 1992, finally divorcing in 1998. They had three children throughout the course of their marriage. At the birth of each child, Mrs. Magill presented birth registration applications to Mr. Magill who then signed them as the father. After separation Mr. Magill paid child support for all three children. In April 2000, DNA testing established that Mr. Magill was not the biological father to the second or third children.
In January 2001, Mr. Magill commenced proceedings against his estranged wife in the Victorian County Court for deceit. He claimed damages for personal injury in the form of anxiety and depression resulting from Mrs. Magill 's fraudulent misrepresentations. He also claimed financial loss, including loss of earning capacity by reason of his psychiatric problems and expenditure on the children under the mistaken belief he was their father. He was awarded damages of $70,000. The County Court found Mrs. Magill 's presentation of the birth registration forms to Mr Magill constituted the representation by Mrs. Magill that he was the father. The Victorian Court of Appeal reversed that decision on the grounds that Mr. Magill had failed to establish the essential elements of the tort of deceit. An appeal against this decision then commenced in the High Court of Australia.
Legal Issues:
Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding Appellant did not satisfy the elements for Tort of Deceit.
All
Magill v Magill was an appeal to the High Court of Australia in the Tort of Deceit. There had been no precedence on the Tort of Deceit in terms of paternity fraud in Australian jurisdiction, and questions were raised regarding the imposition of law and legislation in a marital context and whether the tort of deceit extends beyond the commercial context. The appeal was unanimously dismissed, and the decision became legally binding in all other Australian courts.
Material Facts:
Liam and Meredith Magill married in April 1988 and separated in November 1992, finally divorcing in 1998. They had three children throughout the course of their marriage. At the birth of each child, Mrs. Magill presented birth registration applications to Mr. Magill who then signed them as the father. After separation Mr. Magill paid child support for all three children. In April 2000, DNA testing established that Mr. Magill was not the biological father to the second or third children.
In January 2001, Mr. Magill commenced proceedings against his estranged wife in the Victorian County Court for deceit. He claimed damages for personal injury in the form of anxiety and depression resulting from Mrs. Magill 's fraudulent misrepresentations. He also claimed financial loss, including loss of earning capacity by reason of his psychiatric problems and expenditure on the children under the mistaken belief he was their father. He was awarded damages of $70,000. The County Court found Mrs. Magill 's presentation of the birth registration forms to Mr Magill constituted the representation by Mrs. Magill that he was the father. The Victorian Court of Appeal reversed that decision on the grounds that Mr. Magill had failed to establish the essential elements of the tort of deceit. An appeal against this decision then commenced in the High Court of Australia.
Legal Issues:
Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding Appellant did not satisfy the elements for Tort of Deceit.
All
Bibliography: Chisolm R & Nettheim, 1997, Understanding Law: An Introduction to the Australian Legal System, 5th edn. Butterworths, Australia Fletcher J & Horsfield S, 2007, ‘Of Deceit Esentations ', Paternity, Jan/Feb 2007, pp. 43-46 Sappideen C, Vines P, Grant H & Watson P, Torts: Commentary and Materials, Thomson, Sydney Magill L, 2007, Paternity Fraud in Australia, accessed 21/5/07, http://www.australianpaternityfraud.org/index.html Vines P 2005, Law & Justice in Australia, Oxford, Australia