A woman missed out on sharing in almost $5 million because she accidentally stumbled across her mother having sex with the family doctor when she was a child, a court has heard.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The woman has told the Victorian Supreme Court that unwittingly witnessing her mother's adultery, which led to her parents' divorce in 1971, had cost her millions.
Justice Jack Forrest said the woman, who was not named, was the eldest daughter of a couple who married in 1948, before divorcing 23 years later.
Justice Forrest said the woman had applied to the court in December 2014 for leave to inspect her parents' divorce file which was still available from court records.
The application followed the woman's decision to claim damages from her mother in Western Australia for allegedly reneging on a 2004 agreement to bequeath her one-third of her assets.
"On the applicant's account, almost $5 million has, to date, been disposed of by her mother by way of ... gifts to her siblings or to a trust," Justice Forrest said in a recent judgment.
"In her affidavit, the applicant says as follows: 'The only rational basis that I can infer from my mother's decision to exclude me from the distribution of her assets was that I was the unwilling witness to her adultery with the family doctor when I was a child which ultimately led to my parents' divorce.'"
The judge ordered on January 14 that lawyers for the woman's mother be notified about the application and given the opportunity to file any affidavit or submission opposing it.
"The court has subsequently been advised that there is no opposition to access being granted to the file.
"In essence, the applicant contends that there may be (in fact, she uses the words 'should be') material in the divorce file that will provide an explanation for her mother's conduct in relation to the disposition of assets – inconsistent, on the applicant's case, with the promise made to her by her mother in 2004."
Justice Forrest agreed to grant access to the divorce file because there was a reasonable possibility the documents could help the woman's damages case against her mother, and could provide an explanation for her mother's motivation.
"Given that there is no opposition by the applicant's mother and that the applicant's father is deceased, I see no real privacy issues arising. Finally, I note that the applicant has, in effect said that she will use the information solely for the Western Australia proceeding," the judge added.
The woman is expected to be given access to the divorce file in the next few days, before the case returns to WA.
