Please enter your search query in the form below to search judgments of the Family Court of Australia

using
Number of results per page:
Austlii logo

Judgments search is powered by Austlii


Note: Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish or distribute a report of a case or part of a case, including information contained in a Judgment, which identifies parties, related or associated persons, witnesses or others involved in the case. A breach of the section is a criminal offence. The section also sets out certain limited defences to criminal liability. An example is where the Court has expressly authorised the publication.

  • Wilde & Foster [2018] FamCA 502

    06 Jul 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best interests – With whom the children live – Where there is evidence of mother’s mental illness – Where father alleges risk to children as a result of that mental illness – Where previous consent orders have been made – Where the mother contends that she did not have the opportunity to properly consider her position before consenting to those orders – Supervised time – Balance between meaningful relationships and protection from harm – Parental responsibility – Presumption of equal shared parental responsibility – Conservative approach in interim proceedings – Independent Children’s Lawyer – Liberty to apply following release of Single Expert Report.

  • Peterson & Powell and Ors [2018] FamCA 504

    06 Jul 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental responsibility – where the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility for the children is rebutted – Where the mother and father of the eldest child abdicated their responsibilities in favour of the maternal great grandmother and paternal grandmother – Where the father of the youngest child did not engage with the litigation and his family violence rendered the presumption inapplicable – Ordered the maternal great grandmother shall have sole parental responsibility for both children.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – Where the children derive the most benefit from their relationships with the maternal great grandmother and paternal grandmother – Where the children’s physical and emotional safety must be prioritised – Where the children are at risk of harm within the maternal great grandmother’s home by reason of their exposure to family violence between the mother and her various partners but, with the mother excluded from the home, the risk has subsided – Ordered the children shall live with the maternal great grandmother – Ordered restraints on the maternal great grandmother from allowing the mother to attend her home and from allowing the children to be in the unsupervised company of the mother.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child spends time – Where the paternal grandfather was prosecuted for and convicted of sexual misconduct with an unrelated female child – Concluded the father’s proven sexual misconduct with a minor and his younger brother’s alleged sexual misconduct with the eldest child comprises a sufficient evidentiary foundation to find the children remain exposed to the risk of harm in the paternal grandmother’s home – Concluded the paternal grandmother could successfully protect the children during only confined visits – Ordered the children shall spend time with the paternal grandmother each alternate weekend – Ordered restraints on the paternal grandmother from allowing the children to remain in the unsupervised company of the father or paternal uncle and from allowing the children to be in the company of the paternal grandfather at all.


  • Opunui & Filau [2018] FamCA 501

    04 Jul 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim parenting – Parental responsibility – Magellan identified – Best interests of the child – Unacceptable risk of harm posed by both parents – Where significant weight attached to considerations of protecting children from harm and parental capacity – Minister reluctant to accept parental responsibility for the children – Order made for parental responsibility to be held by the Minister on an interim basis.

  • Newport & Newport [2018] FamCA 472

    22 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where the husband seeks and order for sole parental responsibility and an order for the children’s time with the wife to be supervised – Where the wife seeks an order for sole parental responsibility and no order as to the time the children spend with the husband – Where the husband has withdrawn from spending time with the children since February 2017 – Where the husband alleges that the wife has alienated the children – Court finds there is no evidence of the wife alienating the children from the husband – Court finds the children should recommence spending time with the husband with the assistance of therapeutic counselling – Orders made for the wife to have sole parental responsibility –  Orders made for the children to live with the wife.

    FAMILY LAW – FAMILY VIOLENCE – Where one of the children was witness to an incident of family violence – Where the children have been damaged as a result of witnessing confrontation between their parents – Where an incident occurred between one of the children and a member of the paternal family – Orders made restraining the husband from bringing the children into contact with a member of the paternal family for 12 months – Orders made for the husband to attend family therapy before spending time with the children – Orders made for the children’s initial time with the husband to be supervised.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Adjustment of property pursuant to s 79 – Where the wife seeks sole ownership of the matrimonial home – Where the husband seeks sale of former matrimonial home – Orders made for a 16 per cent adjustment to the wife – Orders made for the husband to transfer his share of the former matrimonial home to the wife and the wife to pay a sum to the husband – Orders made that in the event that the wife is unable to pay the husband the former matrimonial property be sold.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – Where the wife seeks an order for a lump sum child support payment – Where the wife seeks payment of child support arrears or security for payment – Where the husband seeks an order by way of departure from the administrative assessment from the Department of Human Services – Where the husband has been unreliable with his child support payments – Where the Court has not been addressed on the relevant issues – Where the Court cannot make a security order in isolation – Court not satisfied legislative preconditions for the order of a lump sum payment are met – Application of the wife for lump sum payment dismissed – Orders made for the wife to receive payment of the arrears – Application of the husband dismissed.


  • Malone & Malone [2017] FamCA 1157

    17 Apr 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – dispute is about number of days for husband to have children during school terms.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – dispute about adjustment for earning disparity but also husband’s wanton behaviour.


  • Longley & Longley [2018] FamCA 484

    28 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parenting – Where the children, aged 15 and 13, live with the husband – Where the eldest child suffers from an intellectual disability – Where the wife seeks to spend one night per fortnight with the eldest child and a week-about arrangement with the youngest child – Where the wife’s parenting capacity and ability to cope with the children is limited – Where the wife has breached previous parenting orders restraining her from bringing the children into contact with her new partner – Where the children are to live with the husband and spend alternate weekends with the wife as well as school holidays and special occasions – Where the husband has sole parental responsibility.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where the parties seek an adjustment of their property interests in accordance with s 79 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where the husband’s contributions are assessed at 60 per cent – Where the wife has a lesser income but the husband has the ongoing future care of the children, one of which has an intellectual disability – Where the husband seeks 55 per cent of the asset pool – Orders made in accordance with the husband’s application – Order made for the wife to receive a superannuation splitting order.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Where the wife seeks either lump sum or periodic spousal maintenance – Where the Court is not satisfied that the wife is unable to support herself – Application dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the wife seeks that the husband pay her costs of the hearing on an indemnity basis – Consideration of s 117(2A) – Application dismissed.


  • Khalili & Chatha (No. 2) [2018] FamCA 500

    02 Jul 2018

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the Applicant seeks costs of and incidental to his Contravention Application on an indemnity basis - Where not all contraventions alleged were found to be proved – Where the Respondent was not wholly unsuccessful – Where it was not the Respondent’s conduct alone that lead to the necessity for contravention proceedings – Where the circumstances do not justify an order for costs on an indemnity basis or a party/party basis – Application dismissed.

  • Imani & Etola (No. 2) [2017] FamCA 1154

    21 Aug 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Father’s oral application for an adjournment of final hearing – evidence as to father’s medical condition – father’s complaint that reunification therapy has not taken place – principles for conducting child related proceedings – adjournment not consistent with best interests of children

  • Horner & Horner [2018] FamCA 487

    29 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Application by the father for the removal of the Independent Children's Lawyer – Allegations that the Independent Children's Lawyer lacked impartiality, failed to properly fulfil her duties to the Court, failed to properly promote the child’s best interests and has not adhered to appropriate professional standards – Where there is no justification for the Independent Children's Lawyer’s removal – Application dismissed

  • Hillman & Hillman [2018] FamCA 488

    29 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where siblings are split – Where attempts for time to occur between siblings has been problematic – Where each child is aligned with their respective primary carer – Where both children have been exposed to psychological harm by both parents where no prescribed orders for time with the parents have been made – Where any orders for the siblings to spend time with each other and to spend time with their non-primary carer is likely to lead to further proceedings – Best interests decision.

  • Hearn & Woolcott [2018] FamCA 486

    28 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where the parties agree on the majority of the parenting arrangements for their two children – Where the expressed views of the elder child are given considerable weight and no parenting orders are made in accordance with those views – Where orders are made for the younger child to spend time with the father upon certain conditions – Where the mother seeks an order suspending that time if any of the conditions are not met – Where an order is made suspending time for the younger child if certain of those conditions are not met

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where the husband and wife first entered into an informal agreement and then a consent property settlement order – Where the informal agreement was not implemented and the consent orders set aside - Where it is just and equitable to make a property settlement order – Where the net assets of the parties are divided evenly, including an equal splitting of superannuation – Where the husband seeks an opportunity to keep the former matrimonial home and the wife seeks the sale of the property – Where the husband should have the opportunity to retain the home


  • Grant & Aiden (No. 7) [2017] FamCA 1168

    13 Nov 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – leave to file an Application in a Case – leave to intervene in the proceedings

  • Grant & Aiden (No. 6) [2017] FamCA 1159

    14 Nov 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Stay – Disqualification – Adjournment.

  • Gandega & Fulmali [2018] FamCA 491

    29 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM PROPERTY AND/OR COSTS SOUGHT– where order sought against third party to marriage – where entitlements as between third party and husband yet to be determined – where outstanding s106B application as to disposition of husbands shares to third party – where not appropriate to make any interim order – where application dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where application for order as to “taking accounts” in respect of various financial transactions and records– where application inappropriate where court has appointed a Single Expert forensic accountant – where application dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW - PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE –Legal professional privilege – where claim of legal professional privilege – where communication transactional and not for the dominant purpose of legal advice – where otherwise dissemination of communications to others inconsistent with claim for privilege – where claim as to privilege dismissed.


  • Fowles & Fowles (No. 3) [2018] FamCA 503

    29 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTIONS – Interim injunction to preserve assets – Via redirection of monies paid for legal costs

  • Department of Family and Community Services Secretary & Keen and Ors [2018] FamCA 505

    06 Jul 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parenting Responsibility – Where the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility does not apply because there are reasonable grounds to believe the father engaged in family violence – Where the mother would be exposed to an unacceptable risk of family violence if required to interact with the father – Where the children have meaningful relationships with both parents – Where the father lacks insight into the children’s emotional needs and the mother’s parenting capacity is limited due to her unstable psychological health – Where the allocation of parental responsibility is linked to the determination of the children’s residence – Ordered that parental responsibility for the eldest child vests in either the father and paternal grandmother or the mother and maternal grandparents, depending upon with whom the child decides to live – Ordered the mother and maternal grandparents equally share parental responsibility for the three youngest children. 

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – Where there would be adverse repercussions for the children if the current residential arrangements changed – Where the father and paternal grandmother have not promoted the eldest child’s relationship with the mother – Where the eldest child remains opposed to residence with the mother and/or maternal grandmother – Where the views of the eldest child carry considerable weight – Concluded the eldest child may continue living with the father and/or paternal grandmother in accordance with his wishes – Where the three youngest children are settled and thriving in the mother’s primary care – Ordered that the mother and maternal grandparents decide the residence of the three youngest children in the exercise of their shared parental responsibility

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child spends time  – Where the eldest child cannot be forced to spend time with the mother – Where the evidence demonstrates the three youngest children remain at unacceptable risk of emotional harm if they spend time in the father’s care without proper supervision – Where a regime for the three youngest children to spend time with the father under professional supervision would be arduous and expensive – Where there is no suitable private supervisor – Ordered the four children spend time together in the absence of the parties each school holiday period at a contact centre – Orders made for written correspondence between children and non-residential parent/grandparents – Concluded that the manner in which the children spend time and communicate with the non-residential parent/grandparents be left to the discretion of the parties who exercise parental responsibility


  • Adanti & Coli (No. 3) [2017] FamCA 1151

    18 Jul 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim Orders – where one sibling is living in Australia and the other is living in Country D – where orders were made for the children’s and the father’s name to be placed on the Airport Watch List – orders made providing for the father to do all acts and things to return the child to Australia – orders made for the preparation of a s 11F report.

  • Worth & Worth [2018] FamCA 482

    27 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – INTERIM APPLICATION – Where father seeks to spend supervised time with the child prior to trial – Where mother opposes the father spending any time with the child – Where the father has not spent any time with the child since June 2016 –Where the father poses a low risk of sexual harm and emotional harm to the child – Where strict supervision is a means of mitigating those risks – Where orders made for father to spend time with the child supervised by a child psychologist.

  • Woodham & Woodham [2018] FamCA 462

    20 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – where the wife joins a number of entities and the executrix of the late mother of the husband using generic orders seeking relief against them – where the joined parties seek removal on the basis of the absence of any specific relief against them – where the wife maintains that absent discovery, she cannot plead with particularity – where the joined parties seek summary dismissal – where the court permits the pleadings to be rectified but otherwise removes one party – where the matter is adjourned to allow those matters to be attended to.

  • Warrick & Mia [2018] FamCA 426

    12 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Binding Financial Agreement – Where the parties entered into a binding financial agreement under s 90C of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) in 2007 – Where the binding financial agreement specifies that “in the event of a breakdown of the marriage assets and personal effect which are held in both parties names acquired after the marriage shall be property of both parties and should be divided between the parties on a contribution basis” – Where the binding financial agreement does not define “contribution basis” – Where the wife submits that in order to give effect to the parties’ intentions at the time the agreement was made the wording of the agreement should be changed to reflect a division based on direct financial contributions – Where even if the proposed amendment was allowed, the Court is not satisfied that the resultant meaning would be unambiguous – Consideration of Kostres & Kostres (2009) FLC 93-420 – Where the binding financial agreement is unclear and therefore is unenforceable – Where of the Court’s own motion the binding financial agreement must be set aside.

  • Walls & Reynolds [2018] FamCA 481

    24 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim Application – Where father seeks adjournment of the trial for twelve months and for unsupervised time with the child – Where the interests of justice do not favour an adjournment for twelve months – Where the court is not satisfied on an interim basis that the father poses no risk of harm to the child to warrant unsupervised time – Application dismissed.

  • Skinner & Cluny [2018] FamCA 478

    26 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Rise & Asplund issue – Whether there has been sufficient change in circumstances since final parenting orders of 2012 to justify re-litigation – Where father seeks re-litigation of parenting orders – Where mother opposes further litigation -  Where child has recently been diagnosed with anxiety – Where child was very young at the time of last orders – Where parties are no longer agreeable to orders made in 2012 – Where parties appear intent on litigating indefinitely – Where considerations are finely balanced in this matter – Where it is in the child’s best interests to re-litigate the appropriate parenting arrangements for the child.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Application for discharge of Independent Children’s Lawyer – Where the mother asserts that the Independent Children's Lawyer was negligent in not bringing an application in relation to the Rice & Asplund issue prior to trial and for not issuing subpoenae – Where court finds no merit in mother’s arguments – Application dismissed.


  • Ruskin & Bonner [2018] FamCA 459

    19 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – where the mother of two children makes a series of serious allegations against the father but at trial offers equal time – where father alleges mother has borderline personality disorder with paranoid feathers – where two psychiatrists disagree about diagnosis – where all other aspects of parenting indicate equal sharing is best for the children.

  • Raki & Perez Varela [2018] FamCA 473

    25 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – Where the father alleges the mother has withheld the child from him and engaged the child with mental health professionals without his prior agreement in contravention of final parenting orders – Where the mother alleges reasonable excuse – Where the mother did not make the child available to spend time with the father at the times alleged and has contravened the primary orders – Where the mother received advice from hospital staff that the child should be referred to a mental health professional – Where it is suggested that the child not being referred to a mental health professional in the circumstances could be considered withholding of medical treatment by the father – Where the mother had a reasonable excuse to contravene the primary orders as to taking the child to mental health professionals – Primary orders varied under s70NBA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

  • Porter & Porter and Ors (No 2) [2018] FamCA 497

    28 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where a final property settlement order was made by consent – Where that order, amongst other things, required the husband to borrow funds to purchase a residential home for the wife’s exclusive occupation and for the husband to make the mortgage repayments for a period of 10 years - Where the husband has since become bankrupt – Where the husband’s trustee in bankruptcy is contesting the validity of the property settlement order under s 79A(1)(a) Family Law Act or in the alternative relying upon the court’s implied jurisdiction – Where the trustee asserts that the property settlement order was made without the power to do so because it impermissibly brought property into existence – Where new property is not created as the husband’s net assets at the time of the orders exceeded the amount borrowed – Where the challenge to the court’s power to make the property settlement order fails and that part of the application by the husband’s trustee in bankruptcy is dismissed

  • Pescatore & Pescatore [2018] FamCA 461

    20 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – Whether the mother without reasonable excuse contravened parenting orders – Where the mother did not establish that she had reasonable grounds to believe that the contraventions were necessary to protect the child’s health and safety – Where the mother did not otherwise have a reasonable excuse for contravening the orders – Order made requiring the mother to enter a bond

  • Peake & Cousins [2018] FamCAFC 496

    02 Jul 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for expedition – where the mother seeks her application be expedited –application refused.

  • Montagu & Crimmins [2018] FamCA 493

    29 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Extension of the father’s time spent with the child

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application for costs dismissed


  • Mitford & Cilea [2018] FamCA 485

    22 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – ENFORCEMENT – Application to set aside enforcement warrant – Where husband has discharged his obligation under orders to pay the wife a sum of money – Where wife seeks to withdraw enforcement warrant – Where the enforcement warrant is permanently stayed.

  • Lao & Lao [2018] FamCA 492

    29 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where application for costs made by the Applicant wife – Where the husband failed to provide full and frank disclosure in the substantive proceedings – Where the husband’s failure led to the matter being protracted and caused the wife to incur greater costs – Where the circumstances justify an order for the husband pay a portion of the wife’s legal fees – Order made for husband to pay 25 per cent of the wife’s costs as agreed or assessed.

  • Khalili & Chatha [2018] FamCA 495

    02 Jul 2018

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the Applicant seeks costs of and incidental to his Contravention Application on an indemnity basis - Where not all contraventions alleged were found to be proved – Where the Respondent was not wholly unsuccessful – Where it was not the Respondent’s conduct alone that lead to the necessity for contravention proceedings – Where the circumstances do not justify an order for costs on an indemnity basis or a party/party basis – Application dismissed.

  • Jagger & Jagger [2018] FamCA 489

    21 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – default parenting orders

  • Hillman & Carson [2018] FamCA 477

    26 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Where parties were in a de facto relationship for 13 years and have 2 children – Where parties seek adjustment under s90SM Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where it is just and equitable to make an order – Where contributions are assessed as largely equal – Where the respondent will provide the primary care of the children – Where the applicant is granted a 30% interest in the respondent’s parliamentary pension – Where the respondent did not press an application for spousal maintenance but such application was considered and dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where orders have previously been made requiring each party to pay costs and no further order in relation to costs is necessary.


  • Higgins & Moruba [2018] FamCA 467

    21 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – financial agreement – where the husband and wife executed a financial agreement pursuant to s 90B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)  the day before the marriage – where the parties dispute who should be applicant for the threshold hearing – order that the wife be the applicant – where the wife seeks full discovery akin to an application under s 79 – no order made for full and frank disclosure – where the wife seeks that her application to set aside the financial agreement be heard at the same time as her application for property settlement, and other financial orders – where the issues are to remain bifurcated.

  • Fowles & Fowles (No 2) [2018] FamCA 498

    03 Jul 2018

    FAMILY LAW – Ruling on objection to question put in cross examination - Notice to Admit procedure – distinction between “genuine” and “authentic” – dispensation with compliance with Family Law Rules 2004 – admission that documents exist or existed in that form

  • Department of Child Safety, Youth and Women & Townsend & Anor [2018] FamCA 480

    25 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD ABDUCTION – Child brought to Australia – Hague Convention – Application under the Hague Convention for the return of the child to the United Kingdom – Prima face case for return order established – interim order made

  • Chirag & Kanelka [2018] FamCA 476

    05 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – NULLITY – consent, capacity, prohibited relationship – no substance in any ground – application dismissed.

  • Cassidy & Needham [2018] FamCA 494

    02 Jul 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for expedition – application granted.

  • Carlson & Carlson [2018] FamCA 466

    07 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental responsibility – Where equal shared parental responsibility is not practical as the parties cannot communicate and agreement on decisions for the best interests of the children is unlikely – Concluded the residential parent should have long term sole parental responsibility – Ordered the mother have sole parental responsibility

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – Where real weight is given to both children’s strong preference for living with the mother – Where both parties have the capacity to meet the children’s needs – Where both parents have created pressure and conflict for the children – Ordered the children live with the mother and spend time with the father each alternate weekend with additional time during school holidays

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Just and equitable – Where both parties wish to have their property interests separated and adjusted – Where at the commencement of the relationship the father was in a financially stronger position – Where the parties’ contributed equally during the marriage – Where the father did not make full disclosure of his financial position in his trial documents – Ordered the father transfer the mother all his rights in the former matrimonial home – Ordered the parties to cause the wife to be transferred all rights in the motor vehicle in the wife’s possession – Ordered the wife to transfer to the father all her rights in Daydawn Group

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – Application for departure – Where the father is in arrears of Child Support – Where the mother and the father each makes a departure application where the mother is seeking capitalisation of future payments where the father is seeking discharge of arrears – Ordered the applications of both are dismissed


  • Capirola & Capirola [2018] FamCA 490

    29 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – STAY – Where the wife seeks that previous orders for the sale of the parties’ properties be stayed – Where a stay does not prejudice either party – Orders made staying previous orders for sale.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Where the wife seeks that the husband pay her spousal maintenance – Where the husband claims he does not have the funds to make such payments – Where each party cares for the youngest child of the relationship to some extent – Where such care of the child does not preclude either party from working – Where the wife has produced no evidence as to why she cannot work – Where it is not proven that the wife cannot support herself – Application for spousal maintenance dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PROPERTY – Where the husband seeks interim property payment be made to each party – Where the amount sought represents a small percentage of the net asset pool as it stands and can be reversed at trial from the remaining assets if necessary – Orders made for each party to receive an interim property payment. 


  • Caffyn & Protz and Anor [2018] FamCA 499

    04 Jul 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – STAY – Where the wife seeks a stay of two sets of orders pending the determination of her appeal against the latter set of orders – Where the earlier set of orders are consent orders in relation to the position of the liquidator – Where there is no basis to stay that set of orders – Where the latter set of orders are consent property settlement orders between the husband and wife – Partial stay ordered requiring a sum of money to be held in a controlled monies account pending determination of the appeal – Wife restrained from dealing with a property pending the determination of the appeal.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the liquidator seeks that the wife pay his costs of the application – Where the wife was wholly unsuccessful in relation to her application to stay the orders involving the liquidator – Wife to pay liquidator’s costs on a party and party basis – Where the husband also seeks costs – Where the wife was successful in obtaining a partial stay of the property settlement orders made between the husband and wife – No order as to costs.


  • Bernet & Bernet [2018] FamCA 479

    17 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – farming case – large farm holdings – long marriage – where the main issue is contribution arising from assistance provided by husband’s father and its financial consequences – where contribution found to be significant – where the wife wanted a portion of a large farm excised and given to her – where it is found to be unnecessary and not just to do so – where issues of estate planning were contemplated and rejected by the court as an inappropriate exercise of power – where the farms are all held by entities and tax issues arise from alterations.

  • Alam & Sayid and Anor [2018] FamCA 483

    28 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – ENFORCEMENT – Where orders were made in July 2016 and again in May 2017 for the sale of the former matrimonial home – Where the husband continues to occupy the home without paying the mortgage – Where the mortgagee has pending proceedings in the Supreme Court – Where, on the husband’s case, the parties exchanged contracts with purchasers on 8 December 2017 – Where the  husband asserts the purchasers have breached a term of the contract but the wife disagrees – Where the husband has unilaterally purported to terminate the contract with the purchasers – Where the husband can assert loss in the property settlement proceeding and assert the wife should be responsible for it – Where it is an agreed fact that the husband had removed from Australia to Turkey an amount of $3 million – Where the wife risks loss arising from the continuing non-payment of the mortgage, the mortgagees Supreme Court proceedings and the purchasers’ suing for breach of contract – Where the wife is appointed trustee for sale – Where an order is made for the husband to vacate the home

  • Yardsley & Yardsley [2018] FamCA 463

    30 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the husband lodged a Reply out of time and that step is of no effect – Where the husband seeks an extension of time to file and serve a Reply – Where that application is dismissed

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM – partial orders made by consent otherwise interim application reserved


  • Yardsley & Yardsley (No. 2) [2018] FamCA 464

    20 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM – Where the wife is permitted to use the proceeds of the sale of the former matrimonial home to acquire a new property

  • Walliams & Mandrill [2018] FamCA 456

    22 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PROPERTY – Where there is an issue as to the characterisation of a payment that is agreed the husband should pay to the wife on an interim basis – Whether the payment should be characterised as an interim property distribution or as spousal maintenance – Where the determination of the character of the payment is to be left to the trial judge.

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTIONS – EXCLUSIVE OCCUPATION – Where the wife seeks an injunction such that the husband vacates the former matrimonial home – Where both parties have care of their child, aged five – Where the circumstances do not justify an injunction for exclusive possession being granted in favour of the wife – Where the wife’s application is dismissed


  • Ravalli & Ravalli (No. 2) [2018] FamCA 471

    01 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Review of Registrar’s order – Rule 11.02 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) – Where Registrar ordered applications be dismissed under Rule 11.02 – Where Application for Review of Registrar’s decision under Rule 18.08 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) – Where application out of time – Where no application for leave to commence application out of time – Where application for Review dismissed –Where otherwise Registrar’s decision in any event correct.

  • Perez & Fouger [2018] FamCA 444

    15 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – De facto relationship – Where the husband seeks by way of a case guardian that he receive 70 per cent of the asset pool – Where the wife seeks that the asset pool be equally shard between the parties – Where the husband was involved in a serious motor vehicle accident prior to separation – Where the husband received a significant compensation payment for injuries sustained in that motor vehicle accident – Where the use of the compensation money prior to separation is in dispute – Where the husband purposefully dissipated the compensation money following separation – Where the wife has some entitlement to the compensation money – Where the parties contributions up until the husband’s accident were equal – Where the wife made a slightly greater contribution to the asset pool following the husband’s accident – Where the husband has failed to make full disclosure as to his financial position and employment – Where the husband’s evidence as to his employment and future capacity for work is less than satisfactory – Where the husband adduces limited medical evidence as to his health – Where the wife has had the benefit of the sole use of an interim property distribution – Where such distribution should be considered under s90SF(3) and not as an add back – Where a small adjustment in favour of the husband is warranted for s90SF(3) factors – Where the asset pool should be distributed equally between the parties – Where the husband to pay the wife to effect such distribution – Where the wife seeks to retain the former matrimonial home – Where the wife should be given the opportunity to buy the husband’s share of the former matrimonial home – Orders made accordingly.

  • Paviello & Paviello and Anor [2018] FamCA 454

    13 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the applicant sought access to documents from another Family Court matter – Where information contained therein may affect the outcome of the present matter – Whether there was any contempt of Court in attaching a document which was filed in separate proceedings to an affidavit – Where access was granted.

  • Naima & Farina [2018] FamCA 470

    22 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – where the Applicant seeks to prosecute one alleged contravention – where the Respondent seeks that the contravention be summarily dismissed – where the Applicant has not established the Respondent intentionally failed to comply or made no reasonable attempt to comply – where the Application is dismissed.

  • Mineyev & Mineyev [2018] FamCA 453

    29 Mar 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Undefended – Where one party is not able to be contacted – Where one party has been out of contact for a number of years – Where  there are allegations that one party has run up gambling debts against the former matrimonial home – Whether to transfer to property to the applicant

  • Lenz & Cull [2018] FamCA 455

    07 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Subpoena – Objection to subpoena – Whether to set aside a subpoena to a third party – Where a party is a director of the third party – Where there is an allegation that the party’s interest in the third party is greater than stated – Whether there is sufficient “apparent relevance” to the subpoena to allow it to be issued.

  • Idanov & Dunstable [2018] FamCA 440

    14 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION APPLICATION – where the mother admits the many breaches but says she has a reasonable excuse based on the safety of the children – where that evidence is dependent upon the relevant supervisors having some cogent and admissible reason for the views they express – where the evidence is not made available-where the court finds there is no reasonable excuse.

    FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – where the court considers that a bond is the appropriate outcome but gives the mother 24 hours to consider her position-where other options including fines are considered inappropriate as only adversely affecting the children.

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Variation Application – where the mother filed an application to discharge contact orders but altered that to seeking only the opportunity to seek specific supervisors of the father’s time with the children-where the father opposes the mother’s proposal and seeks to have his family involved as supervisors – matter adjourned to the Senior Registrar for those matters to be considered on appropriate evidence – where the Court expresses concern about unregulated supervisory companies not being accountable to the court.


  • Hillsmith & Oliver [2018] FamCA 465

    27 Mar 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – PARENTING – INTERIM – Short term parenting orders – a conservative approach

  • Gilbert & Gilbert [2018] FamCA 442

    15 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PARENTING – Review of Local Court Orders – Hearing de novo – Where the father has appealed orders made by a local court for the children to live with the mother following her unilateral relocation – Where the father seeks that the children return to the area in which he lives – Where the mother and children now live with the maternal grandparents – Where the children have been spending regular time with the father since the Local Court Orders were made – Where the mother claims the father has been more engaged with the children since separation – Where the mother has no family support in the area in which she lived with the father – Where the father has some unspecified physical disabilities – Where the father adduces no evidence as to the impact of these disabilities on his parenting capacity – Where neither party claims the children are at risk of harm in the care of the other parent under the current arrangements – Where the children appear to be settled in the new arrangements – Where it is appropriate for the current arrangements to remain with a fresh set of orders made – Orders made for the children to live with the mother and spend time with the father.

  • Fazarri & Hsiao [2018] FamCA 446

    19 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – RECUSAL – where the wife asserts conflict of interest because judge’s associate has same name as husband’s former wife and contemplates there is a connection – where the wife asserts apprehended bias based on issues of discussion with various counsel – application for recusal rejected.

    FAMILY LAW – ADJOURNMENT – where wife seeks adjournment maintaining husband has not complied with discovery obligations – application refused.


  • Fazarri & Hsiao (No. 2) [2018] FamCA 447

    19 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – undefended proceeding – where the wife was refused an adjournment and then did not participate further, refusing to return to the court on the second day – where the husband satisfies the court that his contribution both financial and non-financial was overwhelming by comparison to that of the wife – where the s 75(2) factors do not assist the wife because of the absence of evidence and because of the fact that the husband maintained that the wife could obtain employment – s 106A order made on the basis of anticipatory non-compliance by the wife

  • Farina & Naima [2018] FamCA 469

    22 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – who is to supervise the child’s time with the father – where the child is nine years old – where consent orders were made in December 2017 in terms intended to remove pressure from the child as recommended by the most recent Family Report – where the father spends two hours every eight weeks with the child – where it is ordered that the father’s partner will supervise the child’s time with her father

  • Ellis & Murphy [2018] FamCA 468

    22 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – International Relocation – Where the parties agree the children should live with the mother but disagree over the mother relocating to the UK with the children – Concluded the mother should remain living with the children in Australia – Ordered the children live with the mother – Ordered the children spend substantial time with the father – Ordered the parties may take the children from Australia on international holidays

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental Responsibility – Where an order for equal shared parental responsibility would not be in the children’s best interests – Where the parties’ conflict is too entrenched for them to negotiate and reach consensus on important issues related to the children – Concluded the parties have not been involved in family violence – Ordered the mother shall have sole parental responsibility for the children

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – just and equitable – Where the parties agree to retain their own superannuation interests and no splitting order should be made – Where the parties agree their financial and non-financial contributions during cohabitation were equivalent – Concluded the father’s post-separation financial contributions redressed the imbalance of the parties’ initial capital contributions and their overall contributions should be regarded as equivalent – Adjustment in the mother’s favour – Concluded the parties’ shares in the non-superannuation assets should be 60 per cent for the mother and 40 per cent for the father


  • Dalton & Nagle 2018] FamCA 475

    24 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – Interim parenting – With whom the children will live and spend time – Where there are concurrent parenting proceedings in New Zealand – Where a final hearing is to commence in New Zealand two days’ time – Where there is no adequate evidence of the current circumstances of the children before the Court in order to determine the best interests of the children – Application dismissed

  • Conrad & Conrad and Anor (No. 2) [2018] FamCA 383

    31 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – EVIDENCE – Expert Evidence – Where it had already been decided that further joint instructions were to be provided to the single expert accountant rather than allowing the tender into evidence of an adversarial accounting expert - Where the Court has now settled a letter of joint instruction to be provided to the single expert accountant.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the wife sought that the husband and the husband’s sister should pay for the additional single expert report – Where the husband and the husband’s sister submitted that the wife should be responsible for meeting the additional costs as the wife was the only party who considered it necessary to get this further report – Where the wife should pay the costs of the single expert providing the response to these further joint instructions in the first instance but that this issue shall be a matter for determination after trial.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the decision to order that the wife pay the husband’s and the husband’s sister’s costs of and incidental to the her Application in a Case was reserved – Where a costs schedule was provided to the Court – Where the wife was wholly unsuccessful in her application – Where the wife is ordered to pay the husband’s and the husband’s sister’s costs on a party and party basis at the conclusion of these proceedings.


  • Clawfer & Clawfer [2018] FamCA 429

    14 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – with whom children spend time – orders made for substantial and significant time - best interests decision

  • Chatterjee & Woodby- Chatterjee [2018] FamCA 474

    06 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – COURTS AND JUDGES – Bias – Application that the Court recuse itself by reason of apprehended judicial bias – Application dismissed

  • Capleman & Capleman [2018] FamCA 457

    28 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – JURISDICTION – DE FACTO RELATIONSHIP – Where the applicant sought a declaration under s 90RD that she and the respondent were in a de facto   relationship – Where the parties were previously married and have two children of the marriage – Where the parties commenced cohabitation some years after their    divorce – Where it was established that the parties were in a de facto relationship during the time they were cohabiting.

  • Cao & Trong and Anor [2018] FamCA 460

    20 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – JURISDICTION - Where the Taxation Commissioner intervenes in a property dispute between husband and wife-where the husband is the nominated debtor-where the husband then discontinues his claim for any relief- where the wife has not discontinued but says that she does not seek orders under s 79 of the Act-where the Commissioner seeks to proceed under s79 against both husband and wife to recover the debt against either or both-where the wife maintains there is no jurisdiction-wife’s submissions rejected-where the court finds the jurisdiction is not denied by the discontinuance and/or refusal of the wife to proceed to seek orders-matter adjourned to enable final hearing to be set down.

  • Bolton & Kilroy[2018] FamCA 458

    19 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final parenting orders – undefended hearing – where the father has not complied with trial directions – where the father has not attended an appointment for a psychological assessment – where the father did not attend the interview for the Family Report – leave granted for the mother to proceed with her application for final parenting orders on an undefended basis – where the child has allegedly made disclosures to the mother that the father has sexually abused her – where the father has denied allegations to the Department but has put no evidence before the Court in accordance with trial directions to refute the mother’s allegations – where the mother’s evidence is unchallenged – where the father has not actively participated in proceedings since January 2018 – where the Court is satisfied that the child is in need of protection from exposure to physical and psychological harm by the father – where it is not in the best interests of the child for there to be equal shared parental responsibility – order that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the child – orders that the child live with the mother and spend no time with the father.

  • Binett & Binett [2018] FamCA 441

    15 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PROPERTY – Where there is a significant matrimonial asset pool – Where the wife seeks sale of two of the parties’ various properties to fund interim property payment to pay her litigation expenses – Where the husband controls the vast majority of the parties’ assets and financial resources – Where the payment the wife seeks comprises less than 10 per cent of the matrimonial asset pool as asserted by the husband – Where there is a need to “level playing field” – Where the wife to receive payment from the husband and sale of property the nature of which to be characterised at final hearing – Where the wife also seeks injunctive orders – Where the husband has subsequent to separation dealt with various assets and financial resources without notice to the wife – Where the relief sought by the wife is not onerous – Where it is appropriate to make injunctive orders restraining the husband from dealing with various assets without notice to the wife – Orders made.

  • Gadde & Gadde and Anor [2018] FamCA 404

    01 Jun 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – identification of the pool of assets – just and equitable to notionally add back certain items into the pool – financial resources – whether evidence sufficient to show that a discretionary beneficiary has a reasonable expectation to call on financial support from the trust – post-separation contributions - Fruits of the litigation lien as payment to former solicitor.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – PARENTING – meaningful relationship – extent of benefit of meaningful relationship – no overnight time – inability of a parent to be involved in the minutia of a child’s life – relationship of less benefit – impact upon international relocation application – estrangement from step-daughter – appropriate for no orders to be made in relation to step-daughter – drug use – low risk to child – drug testing regime likely to result in frustration of other orders – no order for drug testing.