Thorne v Kennedy: A Thorn in the Side of ‘Binding Financial Agreements’?
(2018) 31 Australian Journal of Family Law 183 - 193
11 Pages Posted: 14 Jun 2018 Last revised: 3 Dec 2019
Date Written: March 31, 2018
A discussion of the High Court of Australia's recent decision in Thorne v Kennedy with reference to the three vitiating factors discussed by the High Court: duress, undue influence and unconscionable conduct. It is suggested that the High Court left unclear the status of lawful act duress, and the overlap between duress and actual undue influence remains unclear. Moreover, it is also unclear how equitable principles interact with the provisions of the Family Law Act. The significance of independent legal advice and a post-nuptial binding financial agreement in this case is also discussed.
Keywords: family law, undue influence, duress, unconscionable conduct, binding financial agreements, prenuptial agreements
JEL Classification: K12, K36, K40, K42
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation