Ask A Lawyer

We are here to help; any time of the day.

speak now

Legal Aid

If you think you have nowhere else to go or if you think you can’t afford to. Think again; because we are here for you.

Know more

Latest News

Family law for dads: Does the system discriminate against Fathers?

family law for dads

When it comes to family law for dads, there a variety of deeply entrenched issues that spring their heads up. These issues come from a variety of different sources and can be identified in our cultural history as well as the way the law is interpreted today.

Most commonly, issues regarding family law for dads come in the form of a perceived bias against fathers when it comes to relationship breakdowns. This involves issues, primarily child custody, whereby men feel like the courts favour women in making decisions relating to the future of the family.

Many fathers feel as if the court system believes that mothers are automatically better caregivers and are less likely to be ‘at fault’ for the divorce. While we have a system of ‘no fault’ divorce in Australia, many men feel like they are scrutinised more heavily than women are.

While these issues are most commonly seen through anecdotal examples, there are still statistical trends associated with it that warrant addressing. A combination of pop culture and general ignorance has led a great deal of people to have a pre-conceived notion of what professional family law firms in Sydney are really worth.

Short answer; no

No, family law for dads is not automatically harder than it is for mums. There’s absolutely no precedent or legal ruling whereby one gender is advantaged over the others.

In fact, the court system is far more concerned with the welfare of the children than either of the warring parents. The law states that a child is entitled to a meaningful relationship with their parents as long as no issues (such a violence or drug abuse for example) prevent that relationship.

The child’s safety always trumps any of the issues the parents are having. Each issue is dealt just as seriously, no matter the gender of the parent.

Several different factors influence the arrangements for time each parent can have with their child, such as;

  • Their age,
  • Distance between residential households,
  • The post-breakup relationship of the parents (if any)
  • The work and other life commitments of the parents
  • The child’s opinion (depending on their maturity)
  • The child’s indigenous or cultural background
  • Any other relevant issues

The age of the child is a major deciding factor in family law for dads. The younger the child, the more attached it will be to its primary caregiver as it will obviously be less independent.

The primary caregiver, or primary attachment, is the parent by which the majority of the child’s daily needs are met. This is not to say the other parent isn’t important, it merely states which parent meets the fundamental physiological needs of the child.

Throughout human history, the primary caregiver has been the mother. This is largely biological as men have historically, hunted, gathered and worked to provide for mothers and their children.

This dichotomy between breadwinner and homemaker has been slowly broken down over the centuries to the point where it’s hardly as recognisable. Mandy modern families will share childcare and work responsibilities between mothers and fathers.

In terms of family law for dads however, this historical trend has created a self-fulfilling prophecy. Because fathers have historically always been the breadwinner, courts have assumed that men can get back to work after a divorce with less trouble than women can.

This is because, again historically, women gave up their careers to go and raise children. This means that stay-at-home mums who get divorced will be pressured to re-enter the workforce having lost a lot of their skill and experience.

For family law for dads, this has meant courts have historically always given women higher rights to property settlement and child custody. This is not because of any deliberate sexism with family law for dads, it simply responds to the natural demographics of the population.

Benefits of Sourcing a Conveyancer in Campbelltown

Conveyancer in Campbelltown

The Macarthur region located nearby South West Sydney is a thriving hub of activity in 2018. From businesses and companies expanding their operations to young families looking to begin their life in a region that is developing by the week, this is an economy that is seeing a large degree of growth as it transitions to becoming another central hub close by Sydney. This is where the market of the conveyancer in Campbelltown is seeing a development of its own as clients are engaging with those who can help them move location as efficiently as possible.


As opposed to dealing directly with real estate agents or landlords that have their own vested interests in a move, a qualified conveyancer in Campbelltown can work a duel role as a legal advisor and personal assistant as they follow the right procedures at every turn.


So why source one of these operations when looking for a new premises in the Macarthur region? Here we will outline the benefits of going down this path.

Liaising With The Right Parties


A qualified and experienced conveyancer in Campbelltown will be in place to speak and deal with the bodies that have to be engaged for a transaction to take place. It is not enough just for a piece of paper to be signed or some documents to exchange hands. They will seek out the bank that you are managed by before engaging with fellow conveyancers and lawyers who are representing the other party of the sale. There are times when cheques need to be presented for a settlement to be agreed and your conveyancer in Campbelltown will be able to ensure everything is in order.

Property Category


You might not be aware of this fact inherently, but there will be different regulations and procedures that have to be carried out depending on the category of the property. Whether it be a luxury villa, a small townhouse, a retirement village or a unit, your conveyancer in Campbelltown will have the knowledge to guide you through the right requirements when filing paperwork.

Cost Benefit


If you are convinced that a conveyancer in Campbelltown is not for you, then find another individual or company who has undertaken a solo venture for a property transaction and see how they fared. The issue is that the void of educated and experienced representation will open you up to a myriad of issues down the line once a legally-binding contract has been signed. The investment you spend initially on a conveyancer will act as insurance to future penalties that could be incredibly costly in the long-term.

Exposing All Details


A conveyancer in Campbelltown will be concerned about the details that matter to you, no matter what position you are in for the transaction at hand. Should you be a buyer, then you will need an experienced pair of eyes to run over the important vendor’s statement and contract to ensure that you are made completely aware of all the terms and conditions that are likely to be made event over the course of the agreement. For sellers, they will want to ensure the contract of sale is up to code where they have undertaken their due diligence.



No matter what brand of conveyancer in Campbelltown you source, it is obvious that qualified representation in a property transaction is paramount for your own benefit. The hidden costs and agendas that can take place with agents and landlords makes this scenario a precarious one should you enter this scenario blind to the minefields and obstacles that can be in the way. Head online or speak to the people you know who can find you the best conveyancer in Campbelltown.

Criminal defence lawyers in Sydney: how they are moving with the times

criminal defence lawyers

Times are changing all across the world and this means that more and more people are becoming aware of important social issues. This can include women’s rights, equal pay, LGBTQ rights, as well as much more. Businesses are now forced to be aware of any bias that may be going on within their organisations, and cinema is now taking slow steps to include more diversity.

Changes are also occurring in the legal system which means that criminal defence lawyers in Sydney are changing and evolving too. For example, many criminal defence lawyers in Sydney are now advertising themselves to same-sex couples so that they know they are more than welcome to receive legal support from their firm.

It can be extremely intimidating for a minority to be facing a charge and it is important for them to ensure that they can find legal representation that isn’t going to treat them differently to anyone else. This means that their representation will be respectful, non-judgemental, and un-biased. This is so important because going to court can already be an extremely stressful time, and those who may feel like they are in a minority group need to be supported just as much as anyone else.

Changes are happening for those who are seeking a legal career too

As well as criminal defence lawyers in Sydney now willingly taking on more diverse clients, changes are also happening for those seeking a legal career too. For example, there is more awareness taught on university campuses that are designed to ensure that women are safe throughout their studies.

Furthermore, there are more and more programs out there that are encouraging those with an Aboriginal heritage to attend high-school and university. Similarly, there are many universities that will welcome international students with open arms instead of only accepting students from Australia. If someone is a women or a person of colour, it is also more likely that they are able to join other criminal defence lawyers in Sydney in their field and that they are able to receive the same amount of pay as a white male.

These types of changes will hopefully see that more and more people are not only trusting and feeling safe in the hands of criminal defence lawyers in Sydney, but also that they may consider a career in this field.

Good criminal defence lawyers in Sydney are always learning

It is common knowledge that the wisest person always knows that they have more to learn. This principle is also implemented when it comes to the legal system. Good criminal defence lawyers in Sydney do not simply learn something once and then never look at it again. They are always educating themselves when it comes to not only the ever changing legal system but also to people’s experiences.

They will want to do everything they can to ensure that everyone receives a fair go, so this means they must always be evolving as people and keeping up with the times. With the age of the internet comes more problems and more legal factors to think about. In order for people to be able to safely use the internet, there must be rules put into place.

Good criminal defence lawyers in Sydney will either stay up-to-date with any new laws and regulations, or they will fight themselves to have new things put in place. All in all, whenever facing a trial or charge, it is always important to find a representative that is willing to move with the times. This way it is more likely that the best outcome will be had.

It’s All About the Wording

Three Delivery drivers had decided they were done with the annoyance. They filed a lawsuit against the company they worked for claiming that were owed years’ worth of pay and time they’d spent delivering items. According to the company, however, there was no case even to argue which only made matters worse. According to the local law employees who work more than 40hours per week were supposed to be given overtime pay.

This law took place unless their job was in any of these fields or work: Canning, “Processing, Preserving, Freezing, Drying, Marketing, Packing, Storying, packing for shipment or distribution” of perishable foods. Unfortunately, they were drivers delivering Dairy products, so they didn’t qualify for overtime pay. The drivers, however, did not give up but instead argued that there wasn’t a comma after the word shipment meaning that technically there were not in the wrong.

When it comes to law wording is very important as it can take a turn due to just one mistake anywhere and this is the perfect example. Due to the screw up in the writing of the law, they argued that by law they were in fact entitled to the overtime and that is was not their fault that the law had been miss worded. The court however sided with the Company and not the drivers even though the grammar was wrong stating that it was not meant to be that way.

The case didn’t go away however as they came back with around 120 other drivers to try and push again. This case, however, took an unexpected turn where instead of trying to fight about the comma they decided to appeal wanting to ask the question “what does the contested phrase…mean?” This, of course, was a different way of handling situation, and with a class-action lawsuit behind them, they pushed back into court.

They won the battle and overall the main drivers got $5million USD, this case is an excellent example of how the English language can be a bit tricky. Most laws and rules are written in ways that stop things like this happening, the law is a very strict thing, and usually, the wording matters a lot. This case shows just how vital it can be, even when the grammar was misprinted it meant that they could take a different route. Instead of focusing on the comma they focused on the altered meaning of the law instead.

Pants-less Judge

A Judge in Washington D.C. had a pretty lousy run when a dry cleaner lost his pair of pants. The judge known as Roy Pearson represented himself in the civil court and claimed he was owed $54million USD for a dry cleaner. The store ensures a “Satisfaction Guarantee” which by the sounds of it this just was not satisfied at all.

The case gained national attention almost instantly after the lawsuit was filed and to be fair it wasn’t surprising a court case to do with pants and a judge who believed he was owed $54million USD is interesting. The Pants were supposed to be placed in evidence however the judge claimed that the pants were not his pants and in fact a different pair. Roy claimed that he had been put under a lot of stress and dismay by the incident and let’s be honest by the sounds of it the dry cleaner was also in Distress over the court case. Mr Chung was the dry cleaner, and it seemed as if he was a lot of stress due to this court case as well.

Chung’s attorney Chris Manning told press between hearings whilst holding up the pants that the pants that were supposed to be taken into evidence, in fact, Roy’s. According to Chung’s attorney “When the pants were brought in, Chung noticed three belt loops… and in finding them, realised that they were Mr Pearson’s pants.” The business had been running for over 11 years, and clearly, they had never had anything like this happen to them before.

What Happened?

In the end, the court favoured for the Dry Cleaners, and Roy lost the battle, but some interesting notes showed up before this. The reason why the amount of money ended up being so high in the end was that Roy attempted to go further with the case. Roy wanted Chung to pay enough money for him to be able to rent a car so he could have his clothes dry cleaned elsewhere. Roy also wanted compensation for mental distress and discomfort which he decided should have been around $2million USD on its own. Luckily, however, the judge never let it go through, and Chung one and his Dry Cleaner business lived to see another day.

Lacking A Job

Trina Thompson graduated from Monroe College only to be lacking a job after graduation. Trina decided that it was the fault of her careers councillor for not trying hard enough to find a job for her. She decided to take the school to court and wanted her $70,000 that she used for tuition for her bachelor’s degree back.

The college promised her career advice and job leads however it was never entirely done. She stated, “They have not tried hard enough to help me” in her lawsuit meaning that in her eyes the college had not done what was needed with the power that they had. She hoped that she would be able to gain at least something out of it.

The college’s reply to this was “No college, especially in this economy, can guarantee compliment, Monroe College remains committed to working with all its students… to prepare them for careers and to support them during their job search.” The reply was through their spokesman Gary Axel bank who added that the college continues to help Trina with the services they had promised. His claims have been backed as a survey showed 20% of students who graduated from college got a job straight away in 2009 and it had dropped from the 51% from a study that was done in 2007.

The thing about this is that the Job that she was looking for is a tough job to come by in the first place. Some people have claimed that it took nine months after graduation before they found a job in the industry where she wanted a career. It is a well-known fact, and some people have criticised the case stating that she should have researched into the industry before applying to study in that field.

Of course, she never one the court battle because it’s obvious that the college was not at fault for a weak job market. It’s weird though because a fair few people think that she should have been given the money which seems unfair as logic would dictate that there is no way that a college could ever promise a 100% success rate with finding somebody a job. Even though the case is over it still pops up sometimes when people try and explain why the justice system needs to be looked at a bit more closely, some people think that it is becoming a bit ridicules that cases like this can even happen.

Cookies and Fines

Some people are friendly like the neighbours that bake you a housewarming pie? Or the old lady who gives you some apples growing on her tree out the back? Well, two teenage girls back in 2005 thought it would be nice to deliver some cookies to their neighbours for the same reason. This, however, did not go over as you may have expected it to, however.

Taylor and Lindsey had made a few batches of cookies with a lovely pink heart note stuck on the top saying “Have a great night T and L”. the two girls then set off to make deliveries of the batches of cookies to give them out to the community. They arrived at Mr and Mrs Young’s house and dropped off the cookies on the porch at 10:30 before knocking on the door. Mrs Young who was home at the time called out who was there, but the girls just ran away hoping to surprise her with the cookies.

From Mrs Young’s point of view, she stated that there were Shadowy Figures at the door and when she called out no one answered, and they just ran away. After the incident, Mrs Young went to her sister’s house for the night before heading to the hospital in the morning to be treated for an anxiety attack.

Mrs Young took them to court, and the court stated that the two teens had to pay $900USD to recoup her medical bills. She, however, did not get anything extra because the court ruled that the girls had not intentionally tried to harm Mrs Young in any way. The girls fell very court out apparently according to one of the mothers her daughter was crying because she felt as if she had been punished for doing something sweet.

The girls, however, felt an unexpected turn of events when members of the community offered to help them pay off the money. Later, the court case started to circulate, and Mrs Young was branded as “The cookie monster.”  People thought it was unjust that the two girls were made to pay the money over what was supposed to be an act of kindness that six other neighbours enjoyed and even wrote letters of thanks to the girls.

Mrs Young even received phone calls and mail of people stating home much they disliked her because of her actions. It has slowly died down, but it is odd that court cases where people are trying to make a cash grab get barely any hate yet a court case where Mrs Young just wanted them to pay for her medical bill ended up being so public she received hate mail and calls.

Discrimination and US law

Burger King is a well-known franchise around the world (known as Hungry Jacks in Australia) and just like any other fast food franchise the company has had legal trouble, but this one is a bit odd. A homeless man is suing the corporation for $1.2 million because the employees at the burger king he visited thought the money he had given them was fake. Emory Ellis attempted to buy food at a Boston Burger King with a $10USD bill, but the employees thought it was a fake not, so they called the authorities and had him arrested.

The arrest triggered a probation violation, and Ellis was held in jail without any bail for around three months. In the end, it was found by the Secret Service that the bill was legally meaning that Ellis had been detained for no reason and Ellis never got his money back. Ellis decided after this to sue the company for the incorrect claim and started a lawsuit. Ellis claims that it was decimation because of his race.

Ellis’ attorney stated that if Ellis had “been a white man in a suit” that the employees wouldn’t have even second-guessed and if they did that they probably would have apologised to them. The lawyer also stated that they probably would probably have just not accepted the cash if it was a “white man” without calling the police. This lawsuit had only shown up only after a few weeks before it two African American me were wrongly arrested in a Starbucks because an employee had called police after the two men hadn’t bought anything.

Along with earlier that month, an African American student who fell asleep while falling asleep had the police called on him by a Caucasian student. It is not known whether Ellis’ attorney is going to be using these examples in the upcoming case however the case will be going ahead. It is unknown when the final verdict will be reached, but the chances are high that Ellis will get at least some compensation for being so miss treated. It is unclear on whether Ellis will also be claiming for damages of being wrongfully imprisoned because of this incident but Ellis is determined to get justice for the damage that has been done. This is one of those court cases that is going to take a while, but Ellis’ attorney is confident that they will win the case.

Divorcing Legally in Australia

While divorcing your partner is never a pleasant decision to make, for both you, your children and family, it’s one decision that should be taken seriously and require an attorney to be processed legally.

According to the Family Law Act of 1975, which is the principle of a no-fault divorce in Australian law, when a divorce is granted, the court will no consider the reason that the marriage came to an end. The jurisdiction of Australia has the power to implement the dissolution of marriage. When a divorce is granted, there is no settlement established regarding financial support, the arrangements of children and property distribution.

Applying for Divorce

An application for divorce can be made if either you or your spouse are residents of Australia and intend to live in the country indefinitely, if either of you are Australian citizens by birth, as well as descendant of Australia or have citizenship in the country and lastly, if either of you have lived in Australia for 12 months prior to filing for a divorce.

Applying for divorce can be simple and can even be applied for online. It includes a fee but is the easiest first step of filing for divorce.

Divorce Applications

Since the law does not consider the exact reasons as to why marriage is ended, the only grounds the law except when proceeding with a divorce, is the idea that the marriage will be broken without the two people relevant to the marriage getting back together. If any children under 18 are present with a divorce, it must be established that proper arrangement is made for the children and that they are considered first above anything else.

Get Legal Advice to Assist with Your Divorce

One should hire or consult a lawyer when filing for a divorce. Getting legal advice will help you get perspective on what you’re about to enter into and if sure about your decision, help you proceed smoothly. Lawyers will help you apply the law to your case. There are free legal platforms such as the Family Relationship Advice Line that could provide you with advice regarding law proceedings.

The Cost of a Divorce

Some divorces can turn out to be quite expensive. This all depends on the reasons the divorce has been filed, whether or not the person filing for divorce and their partner do not agree on things such as finances and agreements regarding their children. In these cases, divorce might become very expensive as there will be a lot of factors involved that needs to be resolved before a divorce can be settled by law.

If you are experiencing financial hardship or hold a governmental concession card, you will be eligible to pay a reduced fee. In order to qualify, both the person who filed for divorce and their spouse must qualify for the same reduction. There are also court fees involved, which should be paid with the conclusion of the divorce.

Deportation in Australia

Australia… The land down under that promises beautiful landscapes, more biodiversity than nearly anywhere in the world, desserts, beaches that exceed your imagination and people that are both welcoming and relaxed with, just about everything. When it comes to the law, however, there are a few things that the Australian won’t compromise on when it comes to the rules and regulations of their country. This includes the deportations of individuals that are not lawfully allowed to be in their country, as well as making a point of it.

Australia is recognized as one of the safest countries in the world and they have an extensive set of processes and rules that first of all, make sure only certain foreigners get to enter the country. Apart from that, once you’re in the country and give the Australian government any reason why you shouldn’t be, they’ll send you back to your country effective immediately.

How You Could Get Deported

Non-Australian citizens can reach the status of becoming unlawful in the country in a various number of ways. This includes overstaying their temporary visa, which when breached, the visa could be cancelled, as well as be cancelled due to a consequential cancellation. If anybody provides incomplete or false information when applying for an Australian visa or passenger card or providing false documents to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, as well as the Department of Immigration and Border Protection, could also have their visa cancelled. This could easily be detected through system checks.

Bridging the Laws of Australia as an Unlawful Citizen

Someone who has previously been unlawfully in the country and has been detained could apply for an Australian bridging visa which could release them from their current detention status. This visa can also prevent one from being detained. If a non-citizen applies for the bridging visa and it does not get processed within the prescribed time period, which usually varies between 2 and 90 days, the non-Australian citizen is eligible to be released from detention.

Committing a Crime Could Get Non-Australians Deported

If someone is a permanent non-Australian citizen, they could be deported, within a 10-year residence period, if convicted of an Australian offence paired with a sentence of imprisonment for a year or more. This, however, rarely occurs as the unlawful person’s permanent visa could be cancelled immediately and be removed from the country.

The Difference Between Being Deported and Being Removed from Australia

The procedure of getting deported and being removed from Australia is quite different from one another. Those who are told to leave the country and return to their own will usually do it voluntarily. Being removed, however, will include a more extensive process of which an officer detains an individual that is recognized as a non-citizen. There will be 2-7 days provided to for the non-citizen to apply for a visa. If not applied for within the given period or if not accepted, the non-citizen will be removed from Australia.