Articles from November 2006



Australian Paternity Fraud Judgement overturned

Husband loses ‘duped’ child support claimThe Sydney Morning Herald, Australia, by Tim Dick, November 9, 2006
 

Liam Magill ... lost his claim.  
Liam Magill … lost his claim.
Photo: Paul Harris
 

A man who claimed he was duped into supporting his wife’s two children has lost his claim for damages against his wife for supporting them.

The High Court in Melbourne today rejected a suit by Liam Magill, who married Meredith Magill in 1988, and with whom he thought he had fathered three children.

But the youngest two were not his; fathered instead by another man, his wife’s lover.

He paid child support for all three children until 1999 and, in 2000, DNA testing proved he was not the father of the two youngest children.

Mr Magill won $70,000 in the Victorian County Court for economic loss and a psychiatric condition because, the court found, his wife intended him to sign the birth forms as the father, knowing he was not the father.

That decision was overturned, with the Court of Appeal finding he had not relied on the birth forms to do anything except give the children his surname.


 

High Court hears Liam Magill case

April 7, 2006

The High Court of Australia heard the case and the transcripts are available on the menu on the left side of this web pagee


Australian Government Pays for Ex-Wife’s Legal Appeal Costs – Wife wins appeal – Tremendous public outcry

The public was astounded by a court judgement which supports the mother’s deceit against her 2 children and her husband and which  makes the mother totally unaccountable for civil damages. The judgement also rewards the mother for perpetrating a fraud for many years and collecting child financial support from her ex-husband under false pretences.

In paternity fraud there can be at least 3 victims;

the biological father that may not even know he is a father and who, when the deceit is uncovered, will suffer both mental and financial damages when he didn’t even choose to be a father to that child;

the child whose identity is hidden and who will suffer both mental and financial damage when he/she discovers the truth and perhaps will never know the identity of his/her biological father while he/she is deprived of major medical information about his/her own biological father and;

thirdly,  the husband that not only lost his best child raising years in pursuit of his dream to have his own biological children and raise a family but who has paid for a child that wasn’t his and will continue to pay for long after he divorces the mother who can’t be trusted as a wife.

The ex-wife then will continue to gain financially through child support and/or alimony payments after the divorce after violating the birthright of her children and damaging a great many relatives and other people

Share

Husband wins $70,000 in Australian Paternity Fraud case

http://www.paternityfraudaustralia.com.au/

A World Landmark Paternity Fraud Case
- Husband wins $70,000

In March 2000, Liam Magill of Melbourne, Australia, discovered that 2 of the 3 children born during his marriage were not his biological offspring.

Liam Magill

In 2001, DNA paternity testing proved that a trusted family friend, Derek John Rowe, was actually the biological father of the 2 youngest children. Evidence later proved that Derek John Rowe and Liam’s ex-wife had a 6 year affair, 4 of which were during her marriage to Liam and started shortly after she married Liam. Liam was awarded damages of $70,000.

In addition, the government’s child support collection agency has the legal responsibility to recover both the child support that Liam paid after the end of his relationship with his ex and the cost of raising the 2 children while he acted as the children’s father as a result of the paternity deceit before the separation.

The 2 children in question and Liam’s biological child may even seek to sue their own mother for damages when they become of legal age since their lives have been damaged so much by the mother’s irresponsible damaging behaviour.
More information:

Share