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.

  • Pritch & Manousakis [2016] FamCA 192

    22 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim orders – best interests of the children – where the children are not attending school – where the father seeks orders for the children to be returned to his care and for him to have sole parental responsibility with respect to the children’s schooling – where the mother seeks an order for sole parental responsibility in relation to the children’s education – where the Court does not consider it appropriate to make the orders sought in relation to parental responsibility – where the children have expressed a view that they do not wish to spend time with their father – where the Court declines to make an order changing the living arrangements of the children – where it is ordered that both parties attend a psychiatric evaluation – where an updated family report is ordered – where the father’s time with the children is suspended – where each party is ordered to bear their own costs.

  • Kingsford & Drysdale [2016] FamCA 190

    30 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – equal shared parental responsibility – equal time – separation of siblings – where the Independent Children’s Law urges five night per fortnight – discussion about home base need for consistency – very poor presentation of evidence by parties – allegations of sexual abuse – concerns about father’s capacity in terms of time to commit to parenting – poor relationship between parents – best interests determined – equal time ordered but with a delayed start to allow child to adjust.

  • Peters & Ortona (No 2) [2016] FamCA 189

    30 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN - With whom a child spends time – Where there was an application by the mother to reinstate orders providing for alternate weekend and telephone time with the children – Where a s 11F assessment was ordered to ascertain the children’s views – Where orders were made, pending further order, providing for supervised time between the mother and the children.

  • Shiva & Savastri [2016] FamCA 188

    30 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where children’s names placed on Airport Watch List – Where order made for children’s passport’s to be held by the Court pending further order – Where order for made for such of the children that are in Australia to spend time with the father pending further order.

  • Re: Marco [2016] FamCA 187

    30 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Medical Procedures – Where the applicants, who are the parents of the child, seek a declaration that the child is competent to consent to the administration of stage 2 treatment for Gender Dysphoria – Where alternative orders are sought to authorise the parents to consent to the treatment – Where orders are sought to maintain the confidentiality of the proceedings – Where an order is made dispensing with the rule requiring service upon the respondent, the relevant Government Department – Where a finding is made that Marco is Gillick competent to consent to the medical treatment – Where the applications are otherwise dismissed – Where orders relating to confidentiality are made.

  • Camoes & Blizzard [2016] FamCA 186

    17 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN - With whom a child spends time - Orders made by consent

    FAMILY LAW – ENFORCEMENT OF ORDERS - Application to enforce property settlement order adjourned

  • Sigley & De Santis [2016] FamCA 184

    02 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Consent adjournment in the judicial duty list.

  • Sully & Sully [2016] FamCA 183

    18 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PARENTING ORDERS – inconvenience of having parenting proceedings in this court with parallel proceedings in state court under family violence protection legislation – case management

  • Ridgeway & Katter [2016] FamCA 182

    03 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Transfer of proceedings – Whether the proceedings should be transferred to the Federal Circuit Court for hearing in D Town – Where the mother is experiencing health issues – Where the matter is no longer in the Magellan List – Application granted.

  • Illgen & Yike [2016] FamCA 181

    21 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Adjournment – where the mother sought an adjournment on the morning of the hearing – where the father and the Independent Children’s Lawyer oppose the adjournment application – application for adjournment dismissed

  • Burridge & Yeats [2016] FamCA 180

    03 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Sexual abuse allegations – Best interests of the child – Where the parties have two children together - Whether the older female child is at an unacceptable risk of sexual and/or emotional abuse in the father’s care – Whether an order for the father to have supervised time with the younger son would affect the siblings’ relationship – Where the father has a history of sexual and physical abuse from a young age – Where the child believes she has been sexually abused – Where the child has consistently refused to have unsupervised and supervised contact with the father – Where there is no chance of sustaining a parenting relationship between the two parents.

  • Atuk & Atuk and Anor [2016] FamCA 179

    24 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – adjustment of property interest – where appropriate to make adjustive orders as to property - where consideration as to whether husband’s mother has equitable interest in the matrimonial home by way of express trust, resulting truest or constructive trust – discussion of applicable principles – where resumption of advancement in favour of the husband - where husband’s mother has no equitable interest – where exclusion from consideration various debts of the husband – where consideration of the parties contributions – where consideration of relevant s75(2) factors.

  • Pfenning & Snow (No 2) [2016] FamCA 177

    17 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – where reasons for judgment as to final property adjustment delivered – where parties were given an opportunity to agree on precise form of orders to give effect to reasons for judgment – where parties agreed as to form of all but one of the orders to be made – where the wife sought an order the husband pay to her 45 per cent of rental income from a property pending its sale – where the husband opposed the order – where no application to re-open evidence was brought by the wife – where it was concluded that the disputed order could not be characterised as an order giving effect to the reasons for judgment – where orders were otherwise made in accordance with draft orders.

  • Little & Ashbury [2016] FamCA 176

    15 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Interim parenting orders – social science assessments – party may voluntarily submit to psychiatric assessment.

  • Arthur & Ballantine [2014] FamCA 175

    22 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim arrangement – parties have status quo of six nights per fortnight by husband with children for over 18 months – husband wants seven nights in week-about arrangement – wife wants four nights one week and two the next – importance of night’s irrelevant to the stability – status quo to remain.

  • Dalton & Dalton [2016] FamCA 174

    14 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Interlocutory Application – Where the husband contended he imparted confidential information to solicitors about his financial affairs and those solicitors now act for the wife – Where the husband sought to restrain the wife’s solicitors from acting for her in the substantive property settlement proceedings between them – Where the wife sought dismissal of the husband’s application – Where there is a real chance the wife’s solicitor will become seized of the confidential information imparted by the husband which could be used to his disadvantage in the proceedings – Where adherence to an undertaking given by the wife’s solicitor will eradicate any future risk of misuse of the husband’s confidential information – Where the husband unreasonably delayed his application – Where the prejudice to the wife if the injunction is granted is considerably greater than the prejudice to the husband if the injunction is refused – Husband’s application dismissed

  • Worth & Worth (No 2) [2016] FamCA 173

    12 Jan 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Registrar – Review of decision – Where the mother makes an oral application for the review of a Registrar’s decision to list a case application filed by the mother to a future date – Where the mother seeks to have the Registrar’s decision overturned and for the case application to be listed for determination at this hearing – Application granted. 

    FAMILY LAW – ORDERS – Variation – Application to vary an order made by a Registrar by consent – Application granted.

  • Hester & March [2016] FamCA 172

    09 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Finding of sexual abuse - Interim parenting orders by consent – Where the mother has supported her ex-partner against allegations the ex-partner sexually abused the children – Where the mother concedes that she believes her ex-partner sexually abused the children at trial – Where an injunction restraining the mother’s ex-partner granted by consent - Where the mother consents to interim orders for supervised time with the children – Where the mother consents to attending upon a psychiatrist – Trial adjourned.

  • Sathra & Sathra [2016] FamCA 171

    17 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – Where the father asserts that the mother failed to forward him copies of documents relating to the children; failed to ensure that the children were referred to by a hyphenated surname and failed to advise him of a medical appointment – Where the mother was required to answer six charges – Where having heard the mother’s evidence, none of the six charges are proven – Where the father’s application for contravention is dismissed – Whether the primary orders should be varied pursuant to s 70NBA of the Act – Where it is found that it was in the younger child’s best interests to discharge two of the orders made 2 November 2012

  • Rosario & Rosario [2016] FamCA 170

    22 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Settlement in relation to marriage – Where the husband and wife were married for 31 years and have three adult children –Where the husband refused to fully disclose his financial circumstances – Where the husband withdrew a significant amount of money from joint funds after separation and did not fully disclose how he applied those funds – Where the husband conceded that $495,000 of joint funds was used by him after separation and could not be accounted for, and therefore agreed that this amount should be added back into the property pool – Where the Court found that the husband had exclusive use of at least $666,916 in joint funds after separation – Where that amount was added to the balance sheet as a preliminary distribution to the husband – Where the parties agreed that their contributions were equal to the date of separation –Where the Court found that contributions were equal overall – Where it is appropriate to make a five per cent adjustment in favour of the wife in light of the husband’s deliberate failure to disclose his financial circumstances – Orders made for the wife to retain the matrimonial assets; discharge the husband’s liability over those assets; and pay the sum of $15,000 to the husband.

  • Hartwell & Child Support Registrar [2016] FamCA 169

    22 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Oral application for adjournment – Where the applicant’s Application in a Case was filed three months ago – Where the applicant failed to attend Court either in person, or by phone without notice – Where counsel for the applicant had been instructed by the applicant that the matter was before the Court for a directions hearing – Whether the submission that there had been a “stuff up” is sufficient reason for adjournment – Where applicant chose not to appear by phone when offered the opportunity – Application dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Joinder – Where the applicant seeks to join the Federal Commissioner of Taxation to the proceedings – Where the Federal Commissioner of Taxation has allegedly served material upon the applicant during criminal proceedings in New South Wales – Where the applicant has not given evidence as to the kind of material that has been served upon him to support the proposition of a joinder – Where there is no sufficient legal or factual connection between the criminal proceedings in which the Federal Commissioner of Taxation is a party and proceedings in the Family Law Court – Application dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Stay of proceedings – Whether there is a real risk of prejudice to the applicant – Where the applicant seeks to stay Family Court proceedings pending the determination of criminal proceedings in the Downing Centre Local Court in New South Wales – Where there is no current listing in the in the Family Court before the trial dates in the Local Court – Where criminal proceedings scheduled for two days in March 2016 – Where the applicant’s assertion of risk of prejudice is speculation and without evidentiary basis – Application dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Between parties – Whether the application was wholly unsuccessful – Where the applicant failed to file and serve outline of submissions by the due date – Where the applicant failed to attend Court either in person, or by phone – Where the applicant failed to properly prepare a proper argument in support of it case – Where the financial situation of the applicant relevant in the determination of a cost order – Where the applicant owns property in Sydney in which he has equity – costs order made.

  • Fegley & Salway [2016] FamCA 168

    17 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – Where the father asserts the mother has breached orders of the court – Where the mother asserts that she has a reasonable excuse - Where the mother asserts that the child was suffering a medical condition – Where the mother asserts that she did not understand the orders of the court - Where the mother was found to have a reasonable excuse – Where the father’s Application for Contravention on the second charge is dismissed. 

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the father has conducted the proceedings in a particular manner – Where the father has been wholly unsuccessful – Where it is just that a costs order be made in the mother’s favour – Where the father has been wholly unsuccessful in respect of his opposition to the costs application – Where it is just that a costs order be made in respect of the costs application

  • Tothill & Crowther [2016] FamCA 167

    11 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim orders – best interests of the child – where there are orders for the child to spend time with the father – where the mother has relocated with the child without the permission of the father or the Court – where the mother alleges the child would be at risk in the unsupervised care of the father – where the father seeks an order that the mother be required to return – where the Court is not satisfied that there is a need to protect the child from any harm - where consideration is given to the need to ensure that the child has a meaningful relationship with both parents – where orders are made for the mother to return with the child.

  • Selwood & Selwood (No 2) [2016] FamCA 166

    11 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – interim orders – where the wife seeks that the home loan be paid by the husband – where the husband maintains that the issue is res judicata – where the Court does not consider that it is res judicata as the matter specifically deals with payments of interest accrued – where there is an appeal outstanding – where it is ordered that the husband pay the outstanding amount included the interest charged each month.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – where it is ordered that each party bear their own costs.

  • Martin & Buller [2016] FamCA 165

    18 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM – application for the sale of real property in which the husband lives – where the husband has failed to particularise what property orders he contends are just and equitable – where the husband has repeatedly failed to meet repayments of a loan secured over that real property – where there is no evidence that the husband has the financial capacity to meet ongoing repayments – where the property is to be sold – where the wife seeks sole occupation of the property pending sale – where she does not currently reside at the property – where an order for sole use and occupation is not granted.

  • Hall & Hall [2016] FamCA 164

    10 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim orders –where the father seeks orders for the children to spend time with him each weekend without supervision – where the orders are opposed by the mother and the Independent Children’s Lawyer – where the mother seeks a family report before commencement of the reunification process – where there is an intervention order naming the mother but not the children as protected persons – where orders are made for a further report and no time with the father – where orders are made permitting the mother to travel interstate.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – where the wife seeks orders restraining the husband from taking any further action in the Supreme Court of South Australia relating to a caveat on the former matrimonial home – where the Court refuses to grant the injunction sought – where the wife seeks an order for a variation of the orders restraining the husband from refinancing the property – where there is an issue of cross-linked security – where the husband is permitted to refinance the level of borrowings secured against the property but not in excess of $1.5 million – where the question of the parties costs is reserved to the trial judge.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEUDRE – bifurcation – where the Court does not consider it appropriate for the matter to be bifurcated. 

  • Kane & Kane [2016] FamCA 163

    18 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT IN RELATION TO MARRIAGE – Where the parties cohabited for approximately 29 years – Where principal asset of the parties is the superannuation fund – Where substantial funds spent by the husband from the superannuation fund after separation and before trial - Where there is adjustment for 75(2) factors to account for the money spent– 7.5 per cent adjustment in favour of the wife

  • Kavanagh & Kavanagh [2016] FamCA 162

    15 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Leave to reopen – Whether it is necessary in the interests of justice and best interests of the children to reopen the case – Where, since trial, the father has been charged with criminal offences relating to possession of child sexual exploitation material – Leave granted. 

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim parenting orders – Best interests – Whether the father should be permitted to have supervised contact with the children – Where the father has not been in contact with the children in a year – Where the father’s signed bail undertaking prevents contact with any person under the age of 17 years whatsoever.

  • Higgins & Benson [2016] FamCA 161

    14 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parenting plan – Interim – Whether orders for the father to spend time with the child should be discharged preventing further time – Where the child ran away from the father at a shopping centre on the first day of ordered holiday time with the father – Where the mother refused to return the child to the father after collecting the child from police at the shopping centre – Where the matter has been heard at trial and judgment is reserved – Application dismissed.

  • Harland & Harland [2016] FamCA 160

    18 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – LEGAL COSTS – Where the wife seeks a cost order pursuant to s 117(2) – Where the Court found that there was no basis to award costs to the wife

  • Xuarez & Vitela [2016] FamCA 159

    14 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for recusal – Whether the Judge should recuse himself from hearing any matter in relation to the applicant – Where the applicant alleges apprehended bias – Where the applicant was referred to the Australian Federal Police for breach of s 121 Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where applicant left the courtroom and did not prosecute the application – Application dismissed. 

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Registrar – Review of decision – Whether the Registrar erred in failing to proceed to an undefended hearing – Where trial directions were given to file documents – Where time limits to file documents not adhered to by the respondent – Where the applicant failed to prosecute the application – Application dismissed.

  • Boreham & Dawkins [2016] FamCA 158

    02 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Interim decision — leave to parents to each discontinue contravention proceedings —parties able to proceed with oral applications for substantive orders on a number of confined issues.

  • Paul & Paul and Ors [2016] FamCA 157

    15 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Consequential Order Pursuant To S 80 of the Family Law Act (1975)(Cth)

  • Alama & Edde and Ors [2016] FamCA 156

    16 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM – INJUNCTION – Where the wife sought interim orders in relation to a restraint on the husband and third parties in dealing with the parties’ assets – Where the husband has not filed any documents in the proceedings to date – Where the husband has recently divested himself of his interest in various assets – Whether an injunction is needed to preserve the parties’ assets pending final hearing – Where the third respondent is joined to the proceedings.

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM – PARENTING – Where the wife has sole care of the children – Where the wife receives no financial assistance from the husband – Where the husband currently lives in the Middle East – Allegations of family violence – Where there is insufficient evidence to determine the allegations on an interim basis – Where it is not practicable for there to be equal or significant and substantial time.

  • Iqbal & Jaheer [2016] FamCA 155

    01 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROCEDURAL ORDERS – costs application – where lawyers were responsible for inadequate preparation – no justification for costs orders.

  • Frost & Slater [2016] FamCA 154

    01 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – de facto relationship – proceedings issued out of time – parties agree a refusal would cause hardship – order for leave granted.

  • Valdez & Frazier [2016] FamCA 153

    01 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – Whether orders required a parent to notify the other in relation to General Practitioner appointments for the child – Where orders made make provisions in relation to notification of appointments with health care professionals other than the child’s General Practitioner – Where the contravention could not be established – Application dismissed.

  • Thornton & Thornton [2016] FamCA 152

    16 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING ORDERS – Interim – Variation – Where father accused of sexually abusing the children by the mother – Where trial judge determined the children not at an unacceptable risk in the father’s care – Where the Full Court are reserved in judgment following an appeal – Application dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim – Whether a parent should be permitted to attend the children’s school – Where there is no express entitlement contained within an order or parenting plan for the parent to attend the school – Where the children are not in the parent’s care, supervised or otherwise.

  • Tate and Anor & Jamieson [2016] FamCA 151

    14 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – LEAVE TO ADOPT

  • Merritt & Holdsworth [2016] FamCA 150

    11 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – contact application by father – parties live nine hours apart – mother alleges sexual abuse – court accepts no evidence supports unacceptable risk – mother alleges risk because of father’s alcohol use – court accepts the problem is a risk situation that warrants grandmother’s attendance for a year.

  • Baird & Baird [2016] FamCA 149

    16 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Where the parties agreed it was just and equitable for their property interests to be adjusted – Where the evidence did not support a finding the husband’s expenditure over the last 12 months was wasteful – Where the parties’ contributions were equivalent – Where several features of the evidence justified an adjustment of 5 per cent in the wife’s favour – Where the wife’s overall entitlement to the parties’ net assets and superannuation interests is assessed at 55 per cent – Where the husband’s corresponding entitlement is assessed at 45 per cent – Where part of the adjustment of the parties’ interests can be achieved by way of a superannuation splitting order to more evenly distribute their respective interests in their self-managed superannuation fund

  • Sirola & Sirola [2016] FamCA 147

    14 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best interests – Interim – Where there are two children – Where the father is refusing to return one child to the mother in accordance with the existing orders –Where the mother seeks orders that the children’s time with the father be suspended pending further order – Where the father opposes the mother’s Application – Where it is the father’s case that the child is refusing to return to the mother’s care – Where recent events have exposed the children to psychological harm – Where the Court is of the view that it would be inappropriate to vary the existing orders before the issues can be properly ventilated at a substantive hearing – Orders made to suspend the father’s time with the children pending further order.

  • Stenner & Stenner (No 2) [2016] FamCA 146

    09 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – interim orders – spousal maintenance – where the wife seeks an order that the husband pay spousal maintenance – where the wife seeks an order that the husband pay the mortgage in relation to the former matrimonial home – where the husband is negotiating a moratorium – where the Court considers the wife has established a need but where there is insufficient information to find that on an interim basis the husband has a capacity to pay – where the application is dismissed – where each party is ordered to bear their own costs.

  • Ha & Brumage [2016] FamCA 145

    11 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROCESS AND PROCEDURE – Application dismissed.

  • Massalski & Riley [2016] FamCA 144

    11 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – Where there is a dispute between parties as to the date of cessation of the de facto relationship – Where, if necessary, consent was given for leave to be granted to the applicant to proceed pursuant to section 44(6) –Where there is agreement between the parties for orders to be made facilitating the subdivision of two properties – Where the applicant seeks injunctive relief in respect to properties jointly owned with third parties or solely owned by the respondent – Orders made for the respondent to provide the applicant with written notice of his intention to deal with those properties – Where the respondent seeks the title of a property owned with the applicant be altered following completion of its subdivision, to allocate one lot to each party – Application dismissed – Orders made for the property to remain in the joint names of the parties – Orders made restraining either party from dealing with the property other than in compliance with Orders.

  • Hall & Hall and Ors [2016] FamCA 143

    10 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – objection to subpoenas – where the husband has filed subpoenas seeking numerous and detailed documents relating to the will of the wife’s later father and a number of entities – where consideration is given to whether the subpoena request is a “fishing expedition”, oppressive, burdensome and irrelevant – where the subpoenaed persons seek an order that the subpoenas be set aside on the basis that the material contains confidential and sensitive information – where orders are made for compliance with select items – where time is given for the solicitor to file and serve an amended Notice of Objection in order for further consideration to be given to the issue of legal professional privilege.

  • Masson & Parsons and Anor [2016] FamCA 142

    03 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interlocutory Application – Where a raft of orders were made by consent – Where certain other interim orders were made by determination of the Court after submissions

  • Tilman and Anor & Baxter [2016] FamCA 141

    09 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – ADOPTION – Leave to commence proceedings – joint application by mother and stepfather pursuant to s 60G of the Family Law Act 1975 seeking leave to commence adoption proceedings – Consideration of child’s best interests pursuant to s 60CC.

  • Jinson & Fletcher [2016] FamCA 140

    09 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – ORDERS BY CONSENT – all outstanding applications adjourned

  • Hurley & Simpson [2016] FamCA 139

    04 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where the father seeks an order for equal shared parental responsibility and orders that he spend increased time with the child on a graduated basis – Where the mother and Independent Children’s Lawyer propose that the mother have sole parental responsibility and for the child to have recognition only contact with the father – Where both parties have a history of illicit drug use – Where the mother has engaged in services and the evidence suggests she has a stable lifestyle currently and is able to care for the child – Where the father has continued to use illicit drugs, has failed and refused to undergo some random urinalysis testing – Where the single expert opines the father is unable to place the child as a priority in his life because of his continued dependence on illicit drugs – Where the parents do not communicate at all – Where there is a history of family violence which resulted in the father being imprisoned for a serious assault upon the mother – Where it is not in the child’s best interests for the parents to have equal shared parental responsibility –Where it is found to be in the child’s best interests for the child to only have supervised recognition contact with the father – Where the mother seeks the child’s surname be changed – Where it is in the best interests of the child if the child’s surname remain unchanged

  • Langley & Folett [2014] FamCA 137

    08 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN - With whom a child lives - Best interests of child

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN - Relocation

  • Re: George [2016] FamCA 136

    04 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Medical Procedures – Where the applicants, who are the parents of the child, seek a declaration that the child is competent to consent to the administration of stage 2 treatment for Gender Dysphoria– Where a finding is made that the child is Gillick competent to consent to the medical treatment.

  • Searle & Pencious [2016] FamCA 135

    07 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Application by the wife for a vexatious proceedings order pursuant to s 102QB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – where the husband has frequently instituted vexatious proceedings in this Court and other courts and tribunals – where the proceedings have a long history – final orders made prohibiting the husband from instituting proceedings without first obtaining leave of the Court

  • Tindall & Saldo [2016] FamCA 134

    04 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – STAY APPLICATION – Where the mother sought a stay of the orders – Where the father opposed a stay but submitted there could be a partial stay – Where it could not be said that amongst the 65 grounds of appeal that there were none that were arguable – Where a balance is captured by staying certain orders and varying others so that fortnightly time in the contact centre progresses either for the six months as ordered or for such period as is taken for the appeal to be heard and determined, whichever event occurs later

  • Kouvades & Kouvades and Anor [2016] FamCA 133

    03 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Litigation funding. Whether the court should order that the payment be made and characterised at trial or designate the power being exercised now. Order made that the litigation funding occur using the s 117 power.

  • Harshani & Darnith [2016] FamCA 132

    25 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – ORDERS – CONTRAVENTION – Where the father alleges two contraventions of parenting orders by the mother – Where the Court finds the first contravention is not established – Where the Court finds the second contravention is established and the mother has contravened the order without reasonable excuse – Where the Court declines to impose a penalty on the mother.

  • Smith & Duke [2016] FamCA 131

    03 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – where the litigation is recommenced – where the father seeks orders for sole parental responsibility and that the child live with him – where the mother seeks orders for sole parental responsibility, that the child live with her and spend no time with the father – where the child is reluctant to spend time with the father – where the reluctance is without explanation – where the father has not seen the child in over 12 months – where the father alleges the mother failed to encourage a relationship between the father and child – where the father alleges this occurred following his refusal to allow her to relocate with the child – where the mother rejects the allegation and says that she promoted the child’s time with the father – where the observations of the family consultant are accepted by the Court but the recommendations provide no assistance – where consideration is given to the best interests of the child and the primary and additional considerations – where consideration is given to the definition of a “meaningful relationship” – where the Court does not consider there to be a risk of abuse, neglect or family violence – where it is ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility and that the child live with the mother – where it is ordered that subject to the child’s wishes the child will spend time with the father.

  • Nettles & Nettles (No 2) [2016] FamCA 130

    03 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim distribution – where husband in custody – where serious allegations of violence by the husband – where overwhelming contributions by the wife – discussion as to applicable principles – where appropriate to make interim property orders as sought – husband to have liberty to apply on short notice.

  • Masters & Masters [2016] FamCA 129

    22 Jan 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN - With whom a child lives – With whom a child spends time – Parental responsibility – Best interests of the child – Where the children have lived solely with the father – Where the mother has not attempted to spend time with the children or engaged with the proceedings – Allegations of sexual abuse perpetrated by the mother’s partner – Restraint on contact with the mother’s partner – Supervised time with the mother – Children to live with the father – Father to hold sole parental responsibility.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Non-appearance of a party – Proceeded to final hearing on an undefended basis.

  • Eliot & Dent and Anor [2016] FamCA 128

    03 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom the children live – With whom the children spend time – Parental Responsibility – Where the Department of Family and Community Services has intervened – Issues of drug use and mental health of the parents – Where the children are currently in care – Non-parent party – Need to protect the children from harm – Orders made for the Department to hold parental responsibility.

  • Cartwright & Agerich [2016] FamCA 127

    03 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom the child spends time – Parental responsibility – Best interests of the child – Where the father ceased spending time with the child – Significant distance between the parties – Gradual increase in time with the father – Significant conflict between the parties – Ongoing issues of the child’s health –

    FAMILY LAW – Allocation of parental responsibility to both parents as to medical issues and health with other aspects of parental responsibility vesting in the mother.

  • Bault & Bault [2016] FamCA 126

    03 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim distribution – Where the husband owes the wife monies from a District Court civil verdict and there are previous restraints on dealing with superannuation and funds – Where the wife seeks further interim distribution of monies – Dispute about the property pool and contributions on a final basis – Inappropriate to make a further distribution to the wife pending final resolution – Where the payment of such funds may not be capable of reversal – Appropriate for civil verdict monies to be paid from the sale of the home and the restraints on dealings be lifted.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Expedition – Rule 12A – Various factors considered – No relevant circumstance in which the case should be given priority to the possible detriment of other cases.

  • Lofts & Lofts (No 2) [2016] FamCA 125

    22 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – STAY – where the mother seeks that final parenting orders be stayed pending an appeal – where the application is dismissed.

  • Lomax & Kelly [2016] FamCA 124

    22 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – FAMILY REPORT – where the father seeks orders for the appointment of a specific family report writer – where family reports have previously been prepared in the proceedings by a different family report writer – where the application is dismissed.

  • Bletch & Douglas [2016] FamCA 123

    20 Jan 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Enforcement of orders – Recovery order – Where there is one child who is seventeen and a half years of age – Where final parenting orders were made by this Court in 2008 whereby the mother was permitted to move with the child to United States– Where a court in the United States made orders that the father have sole legal and physical custody of the child – Where those orders are registered in this Court - Where the location of the child is unknown –Where it is appropriate in the circumstances to issue a recovery order.

  • Hill & Ebert and Anor [2016] FamCA 122

    02 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INTERVENTION – Department of Family and Community Services invited to intervene in proceedings.

  • McGuigan & Winters [2016] FamCA 121

    02 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROCEDURE – Interim property settlement.

  • Silver & Woden [2016] FamCA 120

    02 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROCESS AND PROCEDURE

  • Marr & Rather and Anor [2016] FamCA 119

    29 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Review of Registrar’s decision. Costs

  • Mosley & Alban (No 2) [2016] FamCA 118

    02 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – contact – modest dispute about number of days of the husband’s time but significant dispute about which particular days should be ordered.

  • Kozuch & Asker [2016] FamCA 117

    15 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS

  • Krish & Shah [2016] FamCA 116

    15 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim parenting – With whom the children live – With whom the children spend time – Best interests of the child – Parental responsibility – Allegations of children’s exposure to family violence perpetrated by paternal family – Need to protect the children from harm – Benefit to the children of a meaningful relationship – Nature of the children’s relationships – Likely effect of any change in the children’s circumstances – No order made for parental responsibility – Orders proposed by the mother in the best interests of the children.

  • Dickens & Dickens [2016] FamCA 115

    01 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for disqualification – Where no apprehended bias established – Where there is no connection between the complaint and the matter to be determined – Application for disqualification dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for adjournment – Where the father asserts that the substantive proceedings should be adjourned until after finalisation of appeals that have been filed in this matter – Where it is found to be in the best interests of the children for the matter to proceed.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for discharge of order appointing the Independent Children’s Lawyer – Where the father submits the Independent Children's Lawyer is not impartial or independent and is an advocate for the mother – Where there is no evidence the Independent Children's Lawyer has acted contrary to the children’s best interests – Where the father has not demonstrated that the Independent Children's Lawyer is incompetent or lacks professional objectivity – Where there is no basis for discharging the Independent Children's Lawyer on the basis of actual or perceived bias – Father’s application is dismissed. 

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the Independent Children’s Lawyer seeks an updated Chapter 15 expert report be prepared – Where the father objects to the preparation of that report by the expert previously involved in the matter – Where the father asserts that expert is not impartial and has failed to undertake his duties to the court under part 15.5 of the Family Law Rules – Where the court is satisfied that expert should prepare the report and orders are made in accordance with the Independent Children's Lawyer’s application.

  • Carucci & Ponti [2016] FamCA 114

    02 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE

  • Abulafia & Geary [2016] FamCA 113

    09 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim Parenting – With whom the children spend time – Where the father’s time with the child previously suspended – Where the father was convicted of recklessly causing grievous bodily harm to the mother and failing to stop and assist – Where criminal proceedings have concluded – Expert Report prepared prior to conclusion of criminal proceedings available – Where the father now seeks a resumption of time with the child – Best interests of the child – Benefit to the child of a meaningful relationship – Need to protect the child from harm – Family violence – Impact of any time with the father upon the mother’s parenting capacity – No relationship between the child and her father – Father’s parenting capacity – Need for further assessment by the Expert.

  • Tiu & Na [2016] FamCA 112

    01 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – SUMMARY DISMISSAL – Application for the summary dismissal of proceedings seeking a declaration that the parties were in a de facto relationship and consequent orders for the adjustment of property interests – Where the evidence, including that of the applicant if accepted, was capable of supporting a finding that a de facto relationship existed between the parties – Application for summary dismissal dismissed.

  • Ogilvy & Leak [2016] FamCA 111

    29 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – procedural - After a parenting plan has failed to reintroduce a child to the father, the father seeks to litigate - Health professionals dealing with 12 years old child should be asked to provide details to a single expert witness child psychiatrist to give advice to the Court as to what steps should next be taken about the question of the reintroduction.

  • Cullen & Cullen [2016] FamCA 110

    01 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – PARENTING ORDERS – Best interests of the child – Whether an order of equal shared parental responsibility is suitable in relation to one of the two children – Where one of the two children has autism – Where parents disagree in relation to strategies for dealing with the autistic child’s special needs – Where expert evidence shows the autistic child as having a significant degree of impaired intellectual function – Whether the parents ought to have equal shared parental responsibility – Whether the mother ought to have sole parental responsibility with respect to matters concerning the autistic child’s health and education – Whether the mother must consider the father’s view and inform the father of the decisions made with respect to the autistic child’s health and education.

  • Linton & Warne [2016] FamCA 109

    09 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim orders – Where there are three children aged seven, nine, and 10 – Where the single expert expressed concerns in relation to the manner in which the report should be released – Where the report was initially only released to the Independent Children’s Lawyer and subsequently to each of the parents – Where the mother seeks orders that the children live with her and spend supervised time with the father, that she be released from an undertaking in respect of her partner, and that she be permitted to relocate with the children – Where the father opposes the orders sought by the mother and seeks that the mother’s Application be adjourned – Where the ICL is of the view that there is an unacceptable risk associated with the children being in the unsupervised care of the father – Where the ICL is of the view that the mother would not constitute an unacceptable risk to the children if there were certain requirements placed on her – Where the substantive interim proceedings are adjourned so that the issues can be properly ventilated – Where the Court is of the view that there is an unacceptable risk to the children if they are unsupervised in the care of the father – Orders made that the children live with the mother on the basis of certain undertakings and spend supervised time with the father once per week for a period of three hours.

  • Horrigan & Jennings [2016] FamCA 108

    29 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the applicant was successful with part of her application, in having previously made consent orders set aside on the basis that the court lacked jurisdiction to make those orders at that time – Where as a consequence of that determination, the applicant was unsuccessful in being able to prosecute the balance of her application for a variation to those consent orders – Where the respondent was unsuccessful in opposing the dismissal of the whole of the application, with the consequence that he was successful in defeating any further financial claim against him – Where in these unusual circumstances, the most appropriate course is for the general principle to apply that each party bear their own costs – Applications for costs dismissed 

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Where there is no present jurisdiction to determine the outstanding applications – Where an option will be left open for either party to re-list applications in respect of establishing jurisdiction, if either chooses to take that course – Where an Order is made accordingly

  • Winton & Winton [2016] FamCA 107

    29 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – final orders – where the wife seeks detailed orders for the transfer of property and other interests – where the wife seeks orders that she resign as director and secretary of a company and transfer the whole of her interest in the shareholding – where the wife seeks further orders for each party to retain property or chattels in their possession – where the husband seeks a 50/50 property settlement – where the Court is satisfied that it is just and equitable to make an order by way of property settlement – where it is ordered that the wife receive an adjustment being the equivalent of 67 per cent of the known net assets and liabilities of the parties including superannuation.

  • Backford & Backford and Anor [2016] FamCA 106

    12 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim parenting – Application made during the period in which judgment was reserved – Events since judgment reserved – Best interests of the children -- short time in which interim parenting orders are to operate – Risk to the children – Likely effect of a change in circumstances – No recovery order made.

  • Radcliffe & Marlow [2016] FamCA 105

    26 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Where final parenting orders were made in December 2014 providing for the child to live with the mother and to communicate and spend substantial and significant time with the father – Where the mother’s application to vary those final orders was heard in the absence of the father, on an undefended basis

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where there was an altercation between the father and maternal grandmother which resulted in the father retaining the child in his care – Where the mother filed an urgent application for a recovery order – Where the father subsequently returned the child to the mother’s care – Where the child has not seen the father since May 2015 – Discrete issues – Where further orders made in addition to the orders made in December 2014 – Where the father has not filed any material in the current proceedings – Where it is appropriate to allow a further period of time for the father to advise the mother as to whether or not he intends to resume spending time with the child – Where if the father fails to advise the mother, or advises her that he has indeed decided to cease spending time with the child, then the appropriate course is for all current parenting orders to be discharged and without further reference to the parties, new orders to become operative, confirming the mother with sole parental responsibility and residence, and for the father to spend time and communicate with the child as agreed between the parties in writing

  • Krawiec & Haykal [2016] FamCA 104

    04 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best interests – Parental responsibility – With whom a child spends time – With whom a child communicates – Where there is one subject child who is 13 years of age – Where the mother has been the primary carer of the child since separation – Where there is longstanding, ongoing hostility and conflict between the parents – Where it is more probable that not that both parents have engaged in family violence – Where there is no possibility of the parents being able to make any joint decisions about any aspect of the child’s care or welfare – Where it is not in the best interests of the child for the parents to have equal shared parental responsibility –Where the mother does not have the capacity to be able to support a relationship between the father and the child – Where the father has not participated in family therapy – Where the child is reasonably mature and has clearly expressed that she does not want to spend time with the father – Where the Court is of the view that the appropriate arrangement coincides with the child’s wishes – Orders made for the child to live with the mother and for the mother to have sole parental responsibility for the child – Orders made for the child to spend time with and communicate with the father in accordance with her wishes – Orders made restraining the father from attempting to arrange any time with the child.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – COSTS – Where the ICL seeks an order that the mother pay one half of their costs in these proceedings – Where the father has been granted a waiver of his one half of the costs of the ICL – Where the court is of the view that it is not just within the meaning of s 117(2) to make an order for costs against the mother in favour of the ICL – Where the mother seeks an order that the father pay her costs – Where the father already owes substantial costs that the mother has not been able to recover – Order made that the father pay part of her costs.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for a vexatious proceedings order in relation to parenting matters pursuant to s 102QB(2) – Where a vexatious proceedings order had been made against the father in respect of financial matters – Application dismissed.

  • Selwood & Selwood [2016] FamCA 103

    26 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – between parties – where consideration is given to s 117 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) and the method of calculation of costs – where significant factors in determining the application are the conduct of the husband in relation to discovery and admission of facts – where the husband has failed to provide a prompt and honest response to requests or comply the rules or previous orders of the Court – where specific consideration is given to the wife’s offer to settle – where the Court is not satisfied that the wife has established a basis upon which indemnity costs should be paid – where the husband was not wholly unsuccessful in relation to the children’s issues - where it is ordered that the husband pay part of the wife’s costs of property proceedings.

  • Galvan & Galvan and Ors [2016] FamCA 102

    25 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS

  • Gissing & Sheffield [2016] FamCA 101

    25 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – against a case guardian sought for actions said to prolong a trial – power to make an order where case guardian is not a party – difficult role where evidence hard to gather – no basis to depart from s 117(1).

  • Xuen & Chao [2016] FamCA 100

    17 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROCESS AND PROCEDURE – Orders amended

  • Tang & Keats [2016] FamCA 99

    25 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – order sought on a joint and several basis against solicitor and client where adjournment was necessitated by evidence not being comprehensively prepared.

  • Peters & Ortona [2016] FamCA 97

    23 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Leave to file – application by the mother for leave to file further applications – mother previously declared a vexatious litigant pursuant to s 102QD of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – leave granted to file application to reinstate suspended parenting orders – orders made dismissing applications for leave to file applications seeking to enforce property orders and for contravention

  • Parsons & Chou (No 3) [2016] FamCA 96

    19 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COURTS AND JUDGES – Disqualification – Apprehension of bias – Interim parenting decision.