|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Channel 7 - Today Tonight Divorce and child maintenance REPORTER: Rodney Lohse, BROADCAST DATE: March 17, 2005 Liam Magill tried to sue his ex-wife for $70,000 after DNA tests revealed two of their children were not his. But the courts had ruled she did nothing wrong When Liam Magill's marriage to his wife, Meredith, ended in 1992, he was devastated. He not only lost a marriage but also three children. At times his take home pay was reduced to just $130 a week. But a DNA test revealed that Mr Magill was not in fact the biological father of the two youngest children. They were fathered by Meredith's secret lover. "When I heard the results I was struck dumb, I could not speak, I could not function," Mr Magill said. "I personally found it very hard to get my head around that the kids I watched be born – even one of them might not be mine," he said. "I can't explain to people how that is, it is something you can't explain to people." Depressed by his wife's deceit, Mr Magill was unable to continue work as a public servant. "The little girl wasn't mine either, Bonnie is a beautiful kid, she used to look after me," Mr Magill said. Supported by his new partner, Cheryl, Mr Magill took the unprecedented step and sued his former wife for deceit. In a landmark decision three years ago a county court judge ordered Meredith Magill to pay her ex-husband $70,000 in compensation for pain, suffering, and loss of income. But that was not the end of it. Meredith appealed and it went before the Supreme Court The Court of Appeal found in favour of Meredith and she will not have to pay the $70,000. Mr Magill has been left with a big legal bill and he has to pay his ex-wife's legal costs. Vivian Mavropolous, Mr Magill's lawyer, said that the best way she can describe it is harsh. Mr Magill's whole case hinged on the claim he was a victim of fraud and that he was tricked into signing birth registrations. But the court found that while Meredith was having an affair, and suspected that Mr Magill might not be the father to at least one of the children, she did not intend to deceive him and therefore it was not fraud. Cheryl King, Mr Magill's partner said that if people are not outraged by the fact that this is acceptable then what else could they think. "It's really not acceptable as far as this type of deceit being allowed to go ahead," she said. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
