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.

  • Zhou & Wei [2018] FamCA 340

    10 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN  –  PARENTING – interim orders – where the evidence is not helpful relating to various orders – where the court does the best it can

  • Wembley & Wooten [2018] FamCA 334

    17 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for a case guardian – where the application was brought by the husband’s solicitor as an officer of the Court - where the medical evidence indicated the husband was not a “person with a disability” as defined by the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) – where the Court can take into account other factors – where the Court considered the evidence of the husband’s solicitor and counsel in determining his capacity – where findings made that the husband is not a person under a disability.

  • Timms & Chapman [2018] FamCA 327

    15 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parenting – Where final orders were made in December 2017 after a contested 5 day hearing-where the child is aged 14 years and resists spending time-where the child takes matters into his own hands and applies for and obtains an intervention order-where the magistrate grants that order and the order for the father’s time is nullified – where the trial judge ordered therapy but the appointed therapist says it will not work – where the father applies for an alternative therapist-where the court finds that inappropriate – where the father seeks access to the school portal having been denied by the school – where the father has parental responsibility but the wife argues she has sole responsibility for education-consideration of the meaning of such orders – where the court considers it is a matter for the school-application dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW – SUBPOENA – where the was no extant substantive parenting application but the father filed an application for interim orders – where the father sought a subpoena be issued against the school – where the mother objected but the school did not-where the court should not have issued the subpoena – where there was no apparent relevance to the issues in litigation-subpoena set aside.
  • Simpson & Simpson [2018] FamCA 337

    27 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – ENFORCEMENT – where final orders provided for the wife to give vacant possession of a property – where the wife has not vacated the property – where the wife previously gave an undertaking that she would provide vacant possession – where the husband makes an application pursuant to rule 20.54 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) that a warrant of possession issue requiring the respondent wife to vacate the real property and give vacant possession of the land to the husband – where the husband seeks a stay of the operation of the warrant – order that the warrant be made – order that the warrant be stayed until 8 May 2018.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – order for costs against the wife – order that the wife pay the husband’s costs of these proceedings fixed in the sum of $5,776.00, such sum to be paid from the wife’s share of the proceeds of sale of the property.
  • Simmonds & Ablett [2018] FamCA 316

    10 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim Orders – Where mother seeks children to live with her and spend only supervised time with the father – Where father seeks children live with him and spend limited time with mother at a public place – Where both parties allege the other is an unacceptable risk to the children – Where father alleges the mother’s stepfather sexually abused the children and mother has physically harmed the children – Where father has alienated the children from the mother – Where the father has coached the children to make false statements and allegations adverse to the mother and maternal family – Where mother does not pose any material risk of harm to the children –Where father intends on denying the children a relationship with the mother – Where father’s alienation of the mother, his history of drug use and undesirable living conditions poses an unacceptable risk of harm to the children – Where children to move into the mother’s primary care – Orders for a 2 month moratorium period of the father spending time with the children, then moving to supervised contact – Where father has liberty to apply to increase or change conditions of time with the children after 12 months – Where father encouraged to seek psychological assistance to develop insight into the needs and best interests of the children.

  • Sedley & Sedley [2018] FamCA 315

    11 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – ORDERS – Contravention – where the final parenting orders drawn by the parties required mutual communication and non-denigration – where the wife failed to comply but argued the breaches were insignificant.  Where as a group, the braches indicate a lack of respect and ignoring of the importance of the husband’s parenting role – where the appropriate order is a costs order.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parenting – where the parties agree to attend a psychologist but the husband still seeks findings on the contributions.


  • Scott & Scott [2018] FamCA 317

    11 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATIONS – Where the wife sought a raft of interlocutory orders including personal restraints on the husband, the future conduct of the manager, orders compelling the husband to pay certain sums to the entities, procedural orders for trial and orders for costs – Where the husband sought orders dismissing the wife’s Amended Application and for the appointment of receivers and managers – Where various interlocutory orders were made, including the appointment of Receiver and Manager, powers assigned to the Receiver and the parties to equally pay the costs of the manager previously appointed.

  • Riley & Samuels [2018] FamCA 314

    10 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim Application – Where father seeks orders restraining children from having contact with certain persons whilst in the mother’s care and orders for no physical discipline to the children – Where mother does not oppose the father’s application in relation to one of the said persons but otherwise resists application – Allegations of sexual abuse to child by one of the said persons – Allegations of physical abuse to children by said persons – Best interests – Where mother is restrained from allowing the children to have contact with one of the persons – Where mother is restrained from allowing herself and others to physically discipline the children.    

  • Rabkin & Edsall (No 2) [2018] FamCA 330

    03 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – EVIDENCE – Admissibility – where the Applicant seeks to rely on an affidavit of his sister – where the Respondent opposes the application – where the interests of justice are better served by granting the application – where leave is granted for the Applicant to rely on specific paragraphs of the affidavit.

  • Peters & Peters [2018] FamCA 336

    27 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – NULLITY – where the marriage was void because the applicant was lawfully married to another person – decree of nullity ordered.

  • Narkis & Narkis and Anor [2018] FamCA 333

    10 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – PARENTING – where the husband had sole parental responsibility for major long-term decisions but 16 year old child resides with mother – where the husband wanted to know where the child was living-consideration of the issue of responsibilities as a parent and welfare of a child.

  • Millet & Barton [2018] FamCA 339

    09 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN  – PARENTING – undefended.

  • Matthews & Norris [2018] FamCA 341

    09 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Contempt – Where the mother alleges the father misled the Court in prior proceedings concerning their child – Where the father denies the allegations – Concluded the mother’s Application does not appear to enjoy any prospects of success and should therefore be summarily dismissal – Ordered the wife’s application dismissed

  • Mackham & Mackham [2018] FamCA 328

    25 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – time limited to non-overnight time – impact of exposure to family violence on the child’s sense of security and safety.

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY – presumption inapplicable – order for equal shared parental responsibly in any event as in child’s best interests.
  • Langdon & Waterhouse [2018] FamCA 332

    16 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – undefended hearing – where the father has not participated in the proceedings since orders made on 14 December 2017 – where the father has not complied with orders – where the father lives in Ireland – where there have previously been Hague proceedings in Ireland – where a declaration was made that the father had wrongfully retained the children from the jurisdiction of the Family Court of Australia – where the children have been in the mother’s sole care since they returned to Australia in December 2016 – where the father has not spent time with the children since December 2016 – where the father has failed to spend time with the children pursuant to interim orders made in June 2017 – where the father communicates with the children via Skype – where the mother seeks that the children’s time with the father be supervised in Australia – where the mother seeks a reduction in the frequency of the Skype communication between the father and the children – where the mother contends that the father has at times behaved inappropriately during Skype communication with the children and further that he has on occasions been abusive towards her – order made that the father communicate with the children via Skype once a week on certain conditions – where it is not in the best interests of the children for the parents to have equal shared parental responsibility – order that the mother have sole parental responsibility and that she give notice to the father of any proposed decision to be made in the exercise of her sole parental responsibility and she consider the father’s response – order that the children spend time with the father in Australia supervised.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – where the mother seeks that costs of the hearing should be fixed in the sum of $1,650 and reserved – order made fixing and reserving the mother’s costs.
  • Karllsson & Karllsson [2018] FamCA 305

    09 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN –Parenting – Final Orders - Where the parties have two children – Where the mother’s leave to amend her application for parenting orders was dismissed – Where the mothers leave to amend her application in in relation to parental responsibility dismissed – Where leave for the wife to rely upon the expert report of Dr MM is refused – Where Mr D is the single expert in relation to the parenting issues prepared four reports – Where children found to benefit from an ongoing continuing meaningful relationship with both parents – Where there is no need to protect the children from abuse, neglect or family violence from the parents – Where B’s wish to spend more time with her mother not be taken at face value – Where Mr D raised the suggestion of a creative solution – Where children currently spend substantial and significant time with both parties – Where both parties found to offer high quality but different parenting styles – Where there exists ongoing conflict between the mother and farther - Where the father found unlikely to desist form litigation in relation to parenting matters until he achieves his desired outcome of equal time arrangement– Where equal shared parental responsibility ordered for the children – Where a week about arrangement

  • Hou & Ying [2018] FamCA 311

    11 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where the parties were married for eight years – Where there is one child of the marriage – Where each party seeks orders for the division of property – Where the former matrimonial home was acquired by the husband prior to the marriage – Where the husband made greater financial contributions during the marriage – Where the wife made greater contributions as homemaker and parent during the marriage – Where there is a two pool approach adopted for superannuation and non-superannuation assets – Where contributions for superannuation and non‑superannuation assets are assessed to be 80 per cent in favour of the husband and 75 per cent in favour of the husband respectively – Where the wife has the primary care of the child and the husband has a higher earning capacity – Where an adjustment of 10 per cent in favour of the wife is just and equitable.

  • Green & Wall [2018] FamCA 335

    17 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – ENFORCEMENT OF ORDERS – Contravention - where the husband has contravened final orders requiring him to make a payment to the wife – where the final orders provided for the removal of a Lis Pendens (caveat) pending payment to the wife - where the husband has instituted proceedings in E State to remove the Lis Pendens – where it is found the husband instituted proceedings in E State in an attempt to avoid the obligations imposed on him by this Court – contravention found – orders made restraining the husband from doing any act or thing for the purposes of removing the Lis Pendens, pending payment to the wife.

  • Demetriou & Demetriou [2018] FamCA 310

    11 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for injunction to restrain lawyers from acting – Where it is contended that the wife’s lawyers failed to comply with r 31 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) – Consideration of case law and the interests of justice – Application refused.

  • Conner & Conner and Anor[2018] FamCA 348

    21 May 2018

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

  • Christie & Christie [2018] FamCA 331

    16 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – partial property settlement – issue being the quantum of the partial property settlement received by each party – where the husband seeks an equal division of proceeds of sale of the former matrimonial home – where the wife seeks a partial property settlement to purchase a property to live in – order that the wife receive $2,500,000 by way of partial property settlement – order that the husband receive the balance of the proceeds of sale.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – interim spousal maintenance – issue whether the wife should be paid the sum of $750 per week by way of spousal maintenance upon acquisition of a property by her – where it is conceded by the husband that he pay the wife $1,400 until she has acquired a property – order that the husband pay the wife $750 per week after she acquires a property.
  • Butler & Hule [2018] FamCA 338

    28 Mar 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the mother has passed away and the proceedings should have been abated – Where the maternal grandmother was allowed to file an application in the proceedings – Where the maternal grandmother was granted leave to file an initiating application – Where it is plausible that the father has caused physical harm to the children – Where the father present an unacceptable risk of harm to the children – Where the children are to live with the maternal grandmother pending further orders.

  • Zotz & Zotz [2018] FamCA 293

    04 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best Interests – Where the father has disengaged from the proceedings – Where there are allegations of family violence – Where there are allegations the father sexually and physically abused the mother’s older child – Where there are concerns as to the father’s drug use and criminal history – Where the father poses an unacceptable risk of harm to the children on the basis of family violence – Orders made for the children to live with the mother and spend no time with the father – Where the mother seeks that she be allowed to change “the children’s surname” – Where no evidence adduced to support an order for change of the children’s surname – Where no order made as to change.   

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Undefended final hearing – Where the father has filed a Notice of Discontinuance and disengaged from the proceedings – Where it is appropriate for the matter to proceed on an undefended basis.
  • Wilkes & Bolton [2018] FamCA 309

    10 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Exclusive Occupancy – where the wife resides in Queensland and the Melbourne home is unoccupied save for occasions when she comes to Melbourne to visit an ill friend – where the husband is living with his parents and is unemployed – where there is no inconvenience to the wife having regard to her financial position for her to be able to pay for temporary accommodation when in Melbourne – consideration of the distinction between the alteration of property interests and the right to use property – where the husband should have exclusive occupancy of the property until further order.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – where the husband has traditionally been at home and has not worked for many years – where the husband is now 51 years of age – where he seeks spousal maintenance in anticipation of retraining to enter the workforce – where the wife maintains that the husband has not made efforts to obtain employment – where the court accepts that the husband’s position of not having worked and requiring retraining is unchallenged – where spousal maintenance should be ordered.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – QUANTUM – where the wife earns $10,000 per week and says it has expenses of just over half that sum as a medical practitioner running clinics in Queensland – where the husband is unemployed and has been so for a number of years – where the husband is living with his family – where the husband anticipates he would be spending $815 per week if that money was available to him – where the wife wanted the court to make any order limited to basis expenses – where it is not appropriate for the matter to be approached in that way – where the court makes an order for the quantum sought by the husband on the basis that it is reasonable.
  • Tamal & Semak and Anor [2018] FamCA 307

    06 Mar 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where appropriate for application made by the Independent Children’s Lawyer to be heard ex parte – 

    FAMILY LAW – Where property injunction order sought to assist child recovery – Where appropriate for order to be made.
  • State Central Authority & Lloyd [2018] FamCA 324

    12 Jan 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD ABDUCTION – Return application to New Zealand under Hague Convention – ultimately unopposed – importance of mediation.

  • Spencer & Greentree [2018] FamCA 290

    04 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best Interests – Where the father has disengaged from the proceedings – Where the mother seeks orders that the children spend no time with the father – Where there are allegations the father perpetrated family violence against the mother in the presence of the children – Where there are concerns as to the father’s mental health – Where the father has not had a relationship with the children for over four years – Where the older children are exhibiting signs of trauma – Where the father has perpetrated family violence against the mother to which the children were exposed – Where the mother has re-partnered – Where the mother seeks that she be allowed to change the children’s surname to her partner’s surname – Where it is not appropriate that the mother be allowed to change the children’s surname to that of her partner – Orders otherwise made as sought by the mother. 

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Undefended final hearing – Where the father has disengaged from the proceedings – Where it is appropriate for the matter to proceed on an undefended basis.
  • Sorrel & Cutten [2018] FamCA 291

    03 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – where the mother fails to comply with filing directions – where there are concerns about her mental health – where the child has predominantly lived with the father but the mother breaches orders in failing to return the child requiring court intervention – where the mother’s written evidence indicates irrational and irrelevant thoughts but which could be inferred to be threatening behaviour towards the child – where the mother claims not to be a citizen of Australia but the Kingdom of Heaven – child found to be at unacceptable risk – no time with the mother permitted.

  • Somers & Somers [2018] FamCA 326

    23 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – A suspension of watch list order to allow child to holiday overseas – assessment of risk of non-return – Watch list order suspended – Costs ordered.

  • Skipper & Skipper (No 2) [2018] FamCA 308

    02 Mar 2018

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTION – where wife may be diverting money from the business – where wife restrained from attending upon the business premises

  • Reece & Gilmore [2018] FamCA 325

    02 Feb 2018

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application before the Court resolved by consent of the parties – Remaining matter for determination is costs – Costs ordered against the wife – Wife indicated refusal to pay the single expert valuer or allow him access to the property – Poor financial circumstances not an immunity against costs order – Costs of the husband fixed at lower amount – not necessary for the husband’s solicitors to brief counsel to resolve this matter.

  • Pearson & Coli [2018] FamCA 295

    08 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Registrars – Review of decision – Delegation of power to Registrars – where the parties were unrepresented at the time the original orders were made – where the original orders are uncertain and incapable of being enforced – where the consent orders did not achieve the parties’ intention of a 50/50 division of assets – where the Registrar had not properly exercised the delegated judicial power – where it was found the original orders should not have been made – orders made granting an extension of time for the wife to file an application for review of the Registrar’s decision.

  • Olivier & Olivier (No. 2) [2018] FamCA 306

    03 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental responsibility – whether either parent constitutes a risk of harm – assessment of risk on an interim basis –whether father poses sexual or psychological risk – whether mother poses risk due to mental illness – where equal shared parental responsibility providing a protective function.

  • Nsair & Gyaw [2018] FamCA 303

    07 Mar 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Anton Piller order – Where application for such order – Where discussion as to applicable principles – Where in the circumstances it is appropriate to make order sought ex parte.

  • Kerson & Blake [2018] FamCA 294

    04 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – INTERNATIONAL RELOCATION – where Mother seeks to return to her home town with the children – where the father seeks to remain in Australia with the children – where both parents are good parents – significance of mental health struggles by one party – benefits to party and to parenting capacity in move – where one party is superior, but only to a subtle degree in emotional engagement with the children - where the other party’s capacity or willingness to foster the relationship between the children and the other parent carries significant weight.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Prompt Trial – the effects of providing a prompt listing of the final trial.
  • Kerrigan & Janes (No 2) [2018] FamCA 329

    16 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY- Child support departure order – order made that the father pay the child’s psychological counselling costs for a specified counsellor.

  • Karamalis & Karamalis [2018] FamCA 312

    07 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Final parenting orders sought by consent – hearing adjourned to allow child’s views to be sought – United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child contemplates a child being informed of the progress of proceedings which affect him/her.

  • Joresko & Kimpton and Anor [2018] FamCA 320

    02 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Stay application – where the husband made an oral application to stay the trial indefinitely – stay application refused.

  • Jillet & Murdoch [2018] FamCA 313

    11 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best Interests – Where the mother alleges the father poses a risk of physical and sexual abuse to the children – Where the mother seeks that the father spend only limited supervised time with the children on the basis of unacceptable risk – Where the allegations of sexual abuse have not been substantiated and there is minimal objective evidence to support the allegations – Where the father does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to the children – Where the children will benefit from having a meaningful relationship with both parents – Where the mother contends that her parenting capacity will be diminished if orders are made for the children to spend unsupervised time with the father – Consideration of the principles in A & A and Russell & Close – Where the mother is a highly capable parent – Where there is no evidence that the mother would decompensate as a parent if orders were made for the children to spend unsupervised time with the father – Where there are no concerns held as to the parenting capacity of either parent – Where there are some concerns the mother will be unwilling to facilitate the children’s relationship with the father – Where the mother and father live a significant distance apart – Where the father intends to move closer to the children’s current location – Where orders are made as sought by the Independent Children’s Lawyer and he father – Orders made for the parties to equally share parental responsibility and for the children to live with the mother and spend substantial and significant time with the father – Order made restraining the mother from relocating without notice to the father.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Recusal Application – Where the mother alleges that she has not been afforded procedural fairness – Where the mother alleges there is perceived or apprehended bias – Where the final hearing proceeded in a manner that did not meet the mother’s expectations – Where there is no evidence of bias – Where the mother has been afforded procedural fairness – Application dismissed.
  • Holgar & Stott and Anor [2018] FamCA 302

    09 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – REHEARING – Partial remitted hearing – Where issue of father’s time with the child was remitted to the Family Court for rehearing – Where father seeks to spend increasing amounts of time with the child culminating in regular overnight weekend time – Where maternal grandmother seeks no orders as to contact between the father and child, save for the sending of cards and gifts – Where court adopted the trial judge’s findings in relation to the father’s history of violence – Where the father poses a risk of harm to the child in spending time with him – Where the risk outweighs the benefit of a meaningful relationship – Where the maternal grandmother is unable to promote a meaningful relationship between the father and child – Where maternal grandmother’s parenting capacity would be adversely impacted if child were to spend time with the father –Where child’s wishes given weight – Where no orders for time made between father and child – Where father at liberty to send cards and gifts to the child on special days.

  • Hejiz & Hejiz [2018] FamCA 301

    14 Mar 2018

    FAMILY LAW – EVIDENCE – Where it was sought to rely on Notices under s 64 of the Evidence Act 1995 as an exception to the first hand hearsay rule – Where necessary to consider the evidence sought to be adduced – Where evidence did not come within the exception to the first hand hearsay rule – Where the Notices otherwise defective for non-compliance with Evidence Regulations 1995 (Cth) reg 5 – Where the evidence rejected.

  • Gresham & Gresham [2018] FamCA 286

    03 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where the parties consent to having equal shared parental responsibility – Where it is not in the children’s best interests to spend time with both parents on an equal time basis – Where orders are made for the child to live with the father and spend significant and substantial time with the mother – Where both children have a close and loving relationship with the mother which will be able to be maintained by spending regular time with her – Where the proposed order minimised the risk of the children being exposed to conflict and certain erratic and impulsive behaviour.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – Enforcement – Where the father seeks to enforce an outstanding child support debt due by the mother by selling certain identified property in the mother’s possession – Where the Court is satisfied that the Child Support Registrar has been served with the application and does not oppose the enforcement – Where the mother does not oppose enforcement but seeks an alternative proposal to repay the debt –Where the mother is given a further opportunity of 45 days to pay the debt before an enforcement warrant will be issued for the seizure and sale of certain property.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – Child support departure application – Where the father seeks that the Court make an order departing from administrative assessment of child support to be paid by the mother –Where the Court is satisfied that the Child Support Registrar has been served with the application – Where in the special circumstances of the case there are grounds for departure – Where the Court orders that the administrative assessment provisions be departed from and fixed at $12,662 per annum, payable by the mother – Where the father’s child support assessment will be nil.
  • Grant & Aiden (No. 5) [2017] FamCA 1156

    16 May 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND POCEDURE – ADJOURNMENT – Application to join mother and sons to proceedings.

  • Grant & Aiden (No. 4) [2017] FamCA 1155

    20 Mar 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Mother’s application to proceed on an undefended basis – application dismissed

  • Grant & Aiden (No. 2) [2018] FamCA 304

    10 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application by the father for a vexatious proceedings order pursuant to s 102QB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – where the mother 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 mother from instituting proceedings without first being granted leave.

  • Foley & Foley [2018] FamCA 319

    11 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application by wife seeking a costs order on an indemnity basis against the husband on the substantive proceedings – Application by wife in the alternative seeking costs orders on a cascading basis being in a sum determined by the court, or on a practitioner/client basis as agreed and assessed or on a party/party basis as agreed or assessed – Orders made that husband pay a proportion of wife’s costs on a party/party basis as assessed by a judge.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application by wife for costs on the costs application – Application dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Consideration of barristers’ cancellation fees.
  • Foley & Foley [2017] FamCA 1158

    21 Dec 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child spends time – With whom a child communicates – Allegations of violence – Orders that mother have sole parental responsibility for the children – The children shall live with the mother – The middle child shall spend time with and communicate with the father in accordance with her wishes – The younger child to spend time with and communicate with the father in accordance with the joint recommendations of the child’s treating psychiatrist and therapist provided it accords with the wishes of the younger child – Injunctive orders – Specific issues orders.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Application by wife for a property settlement – Long marriage – Superannuation – Where each party sought add-backs – Consideration of the parties’ contributions – Consideration of s 75(2) factors – Where husband’s earning capacity into the future is greater than the husband’s – Orders made in circumstances where Court considers it just and equitable to do so.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – Application by wife for a departure from administrative assessment of child support to provide that the husband pay periodic child support for each of the parties’ two children – Order that the husband pay non periodic child support by way of payment of the children’s private school fees and other expenses.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Application for spousal maintenance by wife – Application dismissed.
  • Burns & Melville [2018] FamCA 299

    08 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – INTERNATIONAL RELOCATION – where the father seeks the child to relocate to live with him in the United Kingdom – where the mother opposes the relocation – where the child is almost fourteen years old – where the mother is the child’s primary care provider– where the mother emigrated to Australia in 2012 with the child, her husband and their daughter with the consent of the father – where the mother commenced Hague proceedings in the United Kingdom when the father held the child over in late 2015 – where it was then ordered that the child return to Australia – where the father’s application is refused.

  • Bilson & Sarsgaard (No. 2) [2018] FamCA 282

    02 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – with whom the children live – where there are allegations the father sexually abused the youngest child – where there are allegations of neglect by the mother – where after separation the parties entered into consent orders and a parenting plan – where commencing January 2013 the children spent about equal time with each parent – where the allegations of sexual abuse first arose in April 2014 – where the youngest child has made disclosures to her mother, aunt, police and treating practitioners about the father – where the children have been spending supervised time with the father since July 2014 – where the youngest child would be at an unacceptable risk of harm if her time with the father were unsupervised – where it is not in the children’s best interest to be separated from each other – where the children will not be at an unacceptable risk of harm in their mother’s care – where the mother is granted sole parental responsibility – where the children will live with the mother and spend time with the father on a supervised basis.

  • Bailey & Bailey [2018] FamCA 318

    09 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – TRUSTS – where the husband, his brothers and their children are specified beneficiaries of a discretionary trust – whether the trust is a sham – whether the trust should be treated as an alter ego of the husband – where wife seeks that assets of the trust be included in the property pool – where wife seeks a Kennon adjustment – where wife makes an application for spousal maintenance - where trust is found to be not a sham or alter ego of the husband – where trust is found to be a financial resource of the husband – where court finds no basis for wife’s Kennon claim – where wife’s application for spousal maintenance is dismissed.

  • Anolick & Anolick [2018] FamCA 321

    18 Jan 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim Application – Application for adjournment of application in a case – refused.

  • Anelli & Sault (No. 3) [2018] FamCA 323

    01 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – Final parenting orders – Children’s views – unopposed by father conditional on mother abandoning her pending application for costs

  • Anelli & Sault (No. 2) [2018] FamCA 322

    24 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Mother’s application for costs following father’s unsuccessful review application – matter adjourned part-heard – for mother’s solicitor to obtain instructions.

  • Zahur & Boyle [2018] FamCA 285

    03 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROCEDURAL – Where the father makes an application for an adjournment under s 57 Legal Aid Commission Act 1979 – Where there are special circumstances in this case which prevent the court from granting the father’s application for adjournment – Where the application for an adjournment is dismissed

    FAMILY LAW – PROCEDURAL – Where the father makes an application for a stay of final parenting orders that allow the children to temporarily relocate outside Australia - Where the father has failed to comply with an order to file a Notice of Appeal and an application for expedition of that appeal – Where the application for a stay is dismissed

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the mother has an order for sole parental responsibility - Where the mother and the Independent Children's Lawyer seek consequential orders in respect of Irish passports for the children – Where the orders sought by the mother and the Independent Children's Lawyer are in the children’s best interests

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the mother and the Independent Children's Lawyer seek an order changing a provision in the final orders to defer the timing of the children’s first block period back in Australia with their father – Where the mother did not leave Australia immediately because of notification relating to her becoming an Australian citizen – Where that constitutes a significant change in circumstances – Where it is otherwise in the best interests of the children to vary the order as sought
  • Weerasinghe & Tamasine [2018] FamCA 296

    08 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for costs – where the father’s Application for Contravention was wholly unsuccessful – where there is a significant disparity in the income of the parties – where the father acknowledged that the child would be unlikely to spend time with him even if his Application for Contravention was successful – order made that the father pay the wife’s costs as agreed and absent agreement to be assessed by a Registrar in accordance with Chapter 19 of the Family Law Rules 2004 on a party/ party basis

  • Watson and Anor & Fellada [2018] FamCA 262

    27 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – With whom a child spends time – Best interests of the child – Whether to suspend final orders – Where the paternal grandparents seek time with the child in circumstances where the father is unable to see the child due to a criminal charge – Quantity of time the child should spend with the paternal grandparents – Assessment of risk to the child – Whether the mother should disclose the child’s residential and school addresses – Where final orders exist that restrain either party from changing the child’s residential or school address – Where the mother should disclose to the Independent Children’s Lawyer

  • Theodore & Theodore (No 2) [2018] FamCA 292

    04 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where application for costs of father’s further interim parenting proceedings – Where father totally unsuccessful – Where application precipitate in time – Consideration of applicable principles – Where general principle displaced – Where father ordered to pay costs as agreed or assessed.

  • Rankin & Rankin [2018] FamCA 268

    27 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – wife’s application for an order for departure from administrative assessment of child support and application for non-periodic child support remitted from Full Court for re-hearing – husband also seeks a departure from administrative assessment of child support – where the wife seeks the husband’s child support income be fixed at $245,000 per annum or that he pay $400 per child per week from 1 January 2016 – where the husband seeks to pay the wife $150 per child per week – departure order that the husband pay the wife $400 per child per week – where the wife seeks the husband pay arrears in a lump sum – no order made for the husband to pay arrears in a lump sum – where the children currently attend private schools – where the wife seeks that the husband pay for school fees and other related expenses – where the husband no longer seeks that the children attend private schools – where the husband does not have the capacity to pay non-periodic child support for school fees and other related expenses.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – wife’s application remitted from Full Court for re-hearing – wife’s application opposed by the husband – where the wife seeks that as and from 1 January 2016 the husband pay to the wife lump sum spousal maintenance in the sum of $75,000 and in the alternative $500 per week – where the husband has no capacity to meet a capitalised spousal maintenance order or to pay a lump sum for retrospective periodic spousal maintenance from 1 January 2016 as sought by the wife –  where the husband does not have the capacity to meet weekly spousal maintenance – no  order for spousal maintenance.
  • Pappas & Pappas [2018] FamCA 297

    08 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim – Where the wife seeks interim costs and partial property settlement – Where the husband seeks funds from a controlled monies account to be directed to the payment of capital gains tax – Where the wife seeks for the mortgage over a jointly owned property to be discharged and the husband opposes that order – Where there is no current assessment of capital gains tax – Court finds that making orders in relation to payment of capital gains tax would be premature – Order made establishing a mechanism for regular mortgage repayment – Order made for both parties to receive a payment from the controlled monies account – Order made for the wife to receive a partial property settlement

  • Padley & Padley [2018] FamCA 283

    02 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Review of Senior Registrar’s decision – Where the father sought to vary interim parenting orders to spend increased and unaccompanied time with the child – Where the child’s age makes it appropriate to reconsider what interim orders are in the best interests of the child – Orders made allowing the father to spend part of his time with the child unaccompanied.

  • Nardini & Nardini [2018] FamCA 289

    01 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – EVIDENCE – Expert Evidence – Where the final hearing is adjourned part heard – Where the mother applies to have the parties and their children reinterviewed for the purposes of  an updated expert report – Where causing the children to be reinterviewed would create a risk to their emotional wellbeing – Where extra delay could be caused by having to recommence cross examining the mother – Where the expert has enough information from the parties that there is no need to reinterview them – Mother’s application is dismissed.

  • Millard & Millard [2018] FamCA 258

    26 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim proceedings - With whom a child lives – With whom a child spends time – With whom a child communicates – Application by mother for a recovery order in respect of the middle child – Application by mother that children live with her and spend no time with the father – Recovery order issued for the middle child – Interim orders made that children live with the mother – Interim Orders made that children spend no time with the father – Specific Issues Orders- Injunctive Orders

  • McGuire & McGuire [2018] FamCA 197

    29 Mar 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – Where Husband seeks order for sale of the parties property – inadequate disclosure – application dismissed - Where the Husband seeks orders for litigation funding – requirements of section 117(2A) not satisfied - where the Husband seeks orders for a partial property distribution – where the Husband has failed to establish that it is in the interests of justice for such a payment to be made.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Where the Wife seeks periodic and lump sum spousal maintenance – Where the Court finds the Wife is unable to support herself adequately for the purposes of section 72 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Extent of the capacity of the Husband to meet such an order – Where the Husband is able to draw down on capital – Order made for the Wife to receive periodic spousal maintenance – Where a lump sum is required to meet arrears of mortgage – order for lump sum maintenance made.
  • Kostas & Kostas [2018] FamCA 246

    11 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Adjustment of property interests after a long marriage – Where the husband has failed to make disclosure of material matters – Where it is not possible to quantify the amount that the husband has received or spent – Where the husband has been largely non-compliant with orders – Where there is no utility in making orders for the wife to retain the Country D property – Where husband will retain the property in Country D and will be given the opportunity to purchase the wife’s interest in the former matrimonial home – Where the former matrimonial home will be sold should the husband not comply with the order.

    FAMILY LAW – DISQUALIFICATION – Where an application was made by the husband for the Judge to be disqualified – Where the application was made at the conclusion of the case – Where the basis for the apprehended bias was a decision to reject a late filed affidavit and not to allow the husband’s evidence to be re-opened – Where the Court is not satisfied that a fair-minded lay observer would reasonably apprehend any bias – Application dismissed.
  • Janko & Janko [2018] FamCA 300

    09 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTIONS – where the husband proposed to divest a family trust of its interest in a company and its associated entities – where the wife sought information in relation to the proposed disposal of those interests and the opportunity to consider that proposal-where the injunctive relief sought by the wife is temporary in nature and would not unduly interfere with the conduct of the business – where orders were made restraining the husband from transferring or disposing of interests in the company and its associated entities pending further order.

  • Highsmith & Kelly [2018] FamCA 267

    18 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – ADJOURNMENT – parenting – where respondent mother seeks adjournment on the basis of her own inadequate material – where the unrepresented father is in prison but wants to proceed – where the case has been in the system for four years – application refused.

  • Dawson & Wright [2018] FamCA 266

    27 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – interim orders – where the trial has been adjourned to enable a number of matters to be attended to – where it is appropriate to make interim orders because there is no unacceptable risk of harm to the children and no plausible explanation as to why the children are behaving the way they are as observed by a supervisor and by the family consultant – where it is appropriate and in the best interests of the children to make the orders.

  • Ciu & Nao [2018] FamCA 288

    04 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where application for costs on an indemnity basis – Where consideration of applicable principles – Where justifying circumstances for costs order to be made – Where circumstances do not justify departure from party/party costs order.

  • Chimin & Fiato [2018] FamCA 284

    03 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – INTERIM – assessment of risk where there are allegations of sexual abuse – orders made for supervised time

  • Boyle & Zahur [2018] FamCA 200

    29 Mar 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – Relocation – Where the mother seeks to temporarily relocate to the Netherlands with the children aged 12 and 13 to live with her de facto partner who is on secondment there and the father opposes the relocation order – Where there is high conflict between the parents – Where at an initial hearing the mother’s application to relocate was refused but the Full Court has remitted the matter for rehearing – Where the mother seeks sole parental responsibility and the father seeks equal shared parental responsibility  – Where the father seeks that the children live with him on a week about basis – Where, since the mother’s relocation application was initially dismissed, the father’s relationship with the children has deteriorated - Where the children have expressed their clear desire to relocate – Where it is in the best interests of the children to make an order for sole parental responsibility in the mother’s favour and to allow the children to relocate to the Netherlands – Where an order is made to allow the children to be known by the surname which includes the mother’s surname. 

  • Boehner & Wickramasuriya [2018] FamCA 276

    30 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – Relocation – Where the mother seeks an order to relocate the child to Perth – Where the father opposes the relocation on the basis that it will adversely impact his meaningful relationship with the child – Where the ICL does not support the relocation – Where the child has a close relationship with the paternal family – Where the mother is found to be the parent with whom the child has the strongest and most reliant, confiding and emotionally attuned relationship – Where the mother’s mental health and sense of well-being is likely to be enhanced by the additional emotional support that she will receive from family and friends in Perth – Where the mother’s parenting capacity will be enriched by moving to Perth and the child will benefit – Relocation permitted.

  • Bidal & Suriz [2018] FamCA 287

    04 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where application for Review of Registrar’s orders as to costs – Where application successful and costs orders set aside – Where offer of settlement made and rejected – Where consideration of applicable principles – Where circumstances justify order for costs.

  • Bentleigh & Bentleigh [2018] FamCA 264

    27 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – INTERIM PARENTING – Best Interests – Where the father seeks orders that the children be removed from the care of the mother and placed in his primary care – Where final orders were made following defended hearing in May 2017 – Where the trial judge found that neither parent posed an unacceptable risk of harm to the children – Where the trial judge made orders that the children live with the mother and spend time with the father – Where a significant issue at final hearing was the mother’s allegations the father had sexually abused the children – Where the mother accepted in the course of the final hearing that the children had not been sexually abused – Where the mother withheld the children from the father four months after final orders were made in May 2017 – Where the mother has been non-compliant with the final orders – Where there has been significant change in the children’s circumstances to justify the reopening of the parenting proceedings on an interim basis – Where the father contends the mother poses a risk of psychological harm to the children – Where the mother contends the father has seriously neglected the children – Where it cannot be found that either parent poses an unacceptable risk of harm to the children – Where the risk of psychological harm posed by the mother can be mitigated by orders being made for the parties to attend therapy – Where the father’s parenting capacity is untested – Where the children would experience significant distress if orders were made as sought by the father – Father’s interim parenting application dismissed – Orders made for family therapy.

  • Baillieu & Baillieu and Anor [2018] FamCA 298

    08 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for sale of property dismissed – Records of company income to be made available.

  • Agnew & Wogan and Anor [2018] FamCA 277

    24 Jan 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where the father has disengaged from proceedings – Where the father is incarcerated – Where it is appropriate for the matter to proceed undefended – Where the mother makes allegations of serious family violence – Where the mother alleges the child has mental health problems – Where the father has perpetrated family violence against the mother – Where the father poses an unacceptable risk of psychological harm to the child on the basis of exposing the child to family violence – Where the father’s parenting capacity is unknown – Where there are serious concerns about father’s ability to care for the child – Where it is not in the child’s best interests to have contact with the father – Orders made for the child to live with the mother and spend no time with the father – Orders made restraining the father from contacting or approaching the mother and child.

  • Abner & Abner (No 2) [2018] FamCA 281

    02 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – Application for departure – Competing applications for departure from the current child support assessment the father is liable for – Where the mother seeks that the father pay a greater amount of monthly periodic child support than the assessed rate – Where the father seeks that his annual rate of periodic child support be set at $0 and in lieu he be liable for the children’s school fees – Whether there are special circumstances to ground a departure order – Where it would be otherwise proper to make a departure order but where it would not be just and equitable to do so – Applications for departure dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW – FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – Payment in a form other than periodic payment – Where the mother seeks that the father pay the children’s school fees and expenses in addition to periodic child support – Where the father seeks to pay the children’s school fees and expenses instead of periodic child support – Where, on the face of the evidence, the parties cannot afford to pay private school fees from income – Order that the private school fees be met from the proceeds of sale of company shares.

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTION IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN – Where the father seeks an injunction restraining the parents from discussing with the children how school fees and expenses are to be apportioned between the parents or the rate of child support payable by the father – Where the injunction can be made pursuant to s 68B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Whether it is in the best interests of the children to make such an order – Where one child has already been exposed to the parents’ financial disputes – Injunctions granted.
  • Xu & Xu [2018] FamCA 255

    26 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where the father has disengaged from proceedings – Where it is appropriate for the matter to proceed undefended – Where there are concerns about the parenting capacity of both parents – Where the mother is a disengaged parent with limited insight – Where the mother is supported by her older son and partner in caring for the child – Where the child’s maternal half sibling is a significant emotional support for him and assists in the child’s care – Where the father does not have the relational skills to develop a relationship with the child – Where the child has expressed the view that he wishes to spend no time with his father – Where the Family Consultant is of the opinion the child has decided that any benefit of spending time with the father is outweighed by the emotional pressure placed on him by the mother – Where it is in the best interests of the child to spend no time with the father – Orders made as sought by the mother.

  • Wernher & Wieck [2018] FamCA 248

    29 Mar 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM – Where the husband seeks that the former matrimonial home be sold – Where the wife seeks to retain the home – Where the wife seeks that the husband pay certain outgoings – Where the husband has no present capacity to meet the outgoings – Where each party’s applications are dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – Where the husband seeks a stay of a child support assessment – Where there was no procedural fairness given to the Registrar in accordance with rule 4.23 of the Family Law Rules – Where the application is dismissed.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the husband is ordered to pay two-third of the wife’s costs on a party and party basis.
  • Salt & Salt [2018] FamCA 259

    26 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – SINGLE EXPERT – application to adduce evidence from further expert – purpose of expert witness provisions-application of Rule 15.49 and the concept of “a substantial body of opinion contrary to any opinion given by the single expert witness” - significance of the issue in the proceedings

  • Radford & Ridley [2018] FamCA 256

    26 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN- With whom a child lives and spends time – Family Violence – Cultural issues – Best interests of the child – Whether to rebut presumption of equal shared parental responsibility – Where the mother has relocated with the child – Where the father denies domestic violence – Meaningful relationship – The effect of a change in the child’s circumstances – Inference to be drawn against a party who does not present a witness – Child’s views – Child’s wishes – Ability of the parents to communicate – Importance of the child maintaining a connection to culture and heritage

  • Potter & Withnail [2018] FamCA 254

    26 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application for expedited hearing

  • Penman & Child Support Registrar and Anor [2018] FamCA 252

    24 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – Where the father pursues an application for a departure order pursuant to s 118(1)(b) of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth) (“the Assessment Act”) varying earlier administrative assessments requiring the payment of child support in respect of the parties’ three children – Where the Child Support Registrar opposes the father’s application primarily, but not only because, the Registrar says what the father is attempting to do is an abuse of process, given the remedies the father has already exhausted – Where the continued prosecution by the father of his application is an abuse of process and an attempt to re-litigate by a different path what the father had already agitated by the usual path set in the Assessment Act and the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 Cth) – Where leave under s 112(1) of the Assessment Act should not be granted in relation to part of the application relating to the parties’ eldest child and any order in relation to that child can only be backdated 18 months prior to the application – Where the father’s application in relation to the parties’ youngest child is dismissed as it does not change the current assessment and is nugatory – Where the applications left relate to the parties’ eldest child from 1 January 2012 to 17 April 2014 and the parties’ middle child from 7 January 2013 to 17 April 2014 – Where the only ground of departure relied upon by the father was s 117(2)(b)(ii) – Where consent orders entered into by the parties and the paternal grandmother in June 2011 provide for the children to live with their parents for 50 per cent of the time that they are available to live with their parents whilst they are not at boarding school – Where the basis upon which the mother consented for the children to go to boarding school was that the father or paternal grandmother pay for those costs and the ground for departing pursuant to s 117(2)(b)(ii) does not arise – Where considerations under s 117(4) of the Assessment Act do not allow a conclusion that it was just and equitable to make the departure orders sought – Where it is not otherwise proper to make the departure orders sought – Where, in the alternative, the orders sought would also not be just and equitable or otherwise proper because the proceedings are an abuse of process 

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the father’s financial circumstances do not preclude making a costs order – Where the Registrar ought not bear the costs of reasonably defending an unreasonable attack – Where the material relied upon by the father is prolix - Where the father has been wholly unsuccessful – Where an order for costs is made on a party/party basis to be agreed or assessed
  • Olivier & Olivier [2018] FamCA 272

    23 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – ORDERS – Previous orders discharged - CHILDREN - Parental responsibility – Non-supervised time – Live with mother – Live with father

  • Mullaly & Mullaly [2018] FamCA 250

    23 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROCEDURAL – Adjournment application – Consideration of s 57 of the Legal Aid Commission Act 1979 – Where there are special circumstances in this case which prevent the court from granting the father’s application for adjournment – Where the application for an adjournment was dismissed

  • Mullaly & Mullaly (No 2) [2018] FamCA 251

    23 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING –Where the father, after his adjournment application was refused, did not return to court – Where the matter was dealt with on an undefended basis – Where orders were made on an interim basis and the father was given 28 days liberty to relist the matter – Where there is a history of family violence - Where the father suffers from severe mental health issues – Where orders are made that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the child, the child live with her and the father spend no time with the child– Where the father has not complied with the order which afforded him the opportunity to relist the matter - – Where the orders have become final

  • Mohammed Salah & Gastana [2018] FamCA 275

    30 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – PARENTING – Contravention – Where the father alleges five counts of contravention against the mother – Where the mother is found to have contravened without reasonable excuse on four counts – Where circumstances mitigate the seriousness of the contraventions.

  • Matech & Matech [2018] FamCA 271

    03 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM – injunctive relief ‑ where the husband has failed to appear before the Court ‑ orders made to preserve the wife’s sole use and occupancy

  • Lamb & Menotti [2018] FamCA 278

    01 May 2018

    FAMILY LAW – ENFORCEMENT – question of whether an order enables the court to vary the payment date or discharge of mortgage date as a machine order or a substantive right – held to be a machinery provision. 

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – orders made in 2017 for the sale of an hotel and accusation by the wife that the husband was not properly pursuing the sale and she sought to be appointed as trustee for sale – evidence indicates that neither party had been diligently pursuing the sale but there was a dispute with the landlord of the hotel over a rent review which the court accepted held up the potential sale – no order made.
  • Kallias & Kallias [2018] FamCA 245

    10 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – objection to subpoena withdrawn – time unnecessarily wasted.

  • Highsmith & Kelly (No 2) [2018] FamCA 280

    27 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – PARENTING – where father of two children is convicted of incest relating to his step-daughter – where he seeks contact with his children – where the evidence is limited but enough to find an adverse psychological impact on the children creates an unacceptable risk.

  • Harvey and Anor & Igin [2018] FamCA 273

    03 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – ADOPTION – leave to commence proceedings – where the child has not spent any physical time with the biological father for over 10 years

  • Harradine & Hermsely-Lane [2018] FamCA 260

    27 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – SETTING ASIDE – whether miscarriage of justice - whether “any other circumstance” – whether implied consent to variation or setting aside

  • Grange & Grange and Ors (No 2) [2018] FamCA 241

    18 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – APPLICATION IN A CASE – STAY – where the husband and second respondent’s application to appear by telephone is not opposed and is granted – where the husband seeks a stay of orders made 30 January 2018 pending determination of his appeal – where the orders made 30 January 2018 do not cast any obligation upon the husband but instead require the third respondent to pay monies into the wife’s solicitor’s trust account – where there is no appeal from the subject orders filed by the third respondent – where there is no evidence that the third respondent supports the application for a stay – where the third respondent chose not to participate in the proceedings – where the husband stands to receive a payment in excess of $500,000 upon compliance of the orders made 30 January 2018 by the third respondent – where it is difficult to discern merit in the husband’s grounds of appeal as contained in his Notice of Appeal – where it is not demonstrated that the husband’s appeal from the subject orders, if successful, will be rendered nugatory by the failure to grant a stay of those orders – the husband’s application for a stay is dismissed – the husband is ordered to pay the wife’s costs of and incidental to the application fixed in the sum of $1,632.81

  • Gallimore & Gallimore [2018] FamCA 249

    23 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where an order is to be made for equal shared parental responsibility – Where the husband seeks an equal time order which is opposed by the wife – Consideration of the words “must consider” in s 65DAA(1) Family Law Act – Where no order is made for equal time – Consideration of other disputed parenting arrangements

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where the wife made initial contributions and financial contributions by way of receipt of inheritances – Where the husband argues that arrangements with his father for the husband to acquire an interest in a company represented a contribution by the husband’s father on the husband’s behalf – Where the value of the company has increased significantly since separation – Where the wife receives a 2.5 per cent adjustment based on all contributions – Where there is a significant disparity in the parties’ earning capacity – Where the s 79(4)(d) – (g) considerations favour the wife so that she receives a further 5 per cent adjustment
  • Evenden & Evenden [2018] FamCA 244

    29 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best interests – Sole parental responsibility – Where the relationship between the parties is poor – Credit –  Where both parties have serious mental health issues – Findings of family violence –  Where both parents pose some risk to the child – Where the child has always lived with the mother – Where the child would be at an unacceptable risk in the unsupervised care of the father – Where regular telephone communication between the child and father found not to be in the best interests of the child – Restraint on relocation – Where the wife is free to change her location of residence as long as orders are complied with – Ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility for the child – Ordered that the child live with the mother – Order for the father to spend supervised time with the child.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Sale of property – Where the wife made an application seeking an order permitting her to sell her property to cover legal fees – Where consent order was made to sell the wife’s property – Where the wife sought leave to reopen her case in the substantive proceedings to provide evidence about the proceeds of the sale of the wife’s property, discharge of the mortgage and repayment of a loan – Leave granted.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Settlement proceedings – Where it was found to be just and equitable to make an order under s 79 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Contributions at time of cohabitation – Where both parties found to have made direct financial contributions – Where the wife has been the major income earner – Where both parties have made significant contributions to the welfare of the family – Where wife’s contribution in this regard was greater than that of the husband – Contributions following separation – Contributions fall significantly in favour of the wife – Contributions assessed at 57 per cent to the wife and 43 per cent to the husband – Section 75(2) factors Where both parties have serious mental health conditions – Where both parties likely to earn current level of income for the foreseeable future – Where the wife is the primary caregiver for the child and will continue to have major financial responsibility for the child – Where the husband pays only modest child support – Where there is a substantial level of personal debt of both parties – Adjustment of 10 percent made in favour of the wife – Wife to receive 67 per cent of available property and superannuation and husband 33 per cent.
  • Dylan & Bryson [2018] FamCA 269

    18 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – international relocation   undefended hearing – mother permitted to relocate with child to New Zealand Baumann J

  • Department of Family and Community Services & Smollett [2018] FamCA 265

    24 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Adjournment – Hague – Where the respondent mother seeks a third adjournment to obtain a grant of Legal Aid –  Where the application should be dealt with promptly – Where circumstances do not justify allowing an adjournment– Application dismissed.

  • Currie & Wilkins [2018] FamCA 279

    20 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROCEDURAL ORDERS – where matter had been listed in March for directions but husband not available or did not attend – where the proceedings were adjourned but he again did not attend – where on the morning of the hearing, the husband seeks to be heard by telephone – where because of the history and large volume of material, that was not appropriate – matter set down for trial.

  • Critas & Critas [2018] FamCA 253

    26 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for expedited hearing – application dismissed.

  • Campbell & Morgan and Anor [2018] FamCA 261

    27 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application for costs by an intervener against the applicant father – where the father became a bankrupt in 2006 and the Trustee in Bankruptcy became the intervener – where the father and the mother have been in a dispute over financial de facto property and parenting matters – where the father withdrew the property proceedings on realisation of the extent of his financial predicament – where the Trustee in Bankruptcy sought costs against the father – where no trial affidavits had been prepared – Ordered the application for costs is dismissed

  • Brownless & Warren (No 2) [2018] FamCA 257

    19 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where party wholly unsuccessful

  • Bilson & Sarsgaard [2018] FamCA 274

    23 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – ORDERS – Contravention – where the Applicant seeks to prosecute a number of alleged contraventions – where a number of those contraventions have been the subject of summary dismissal – where two counts of alleged contravention remain – where the Applicant has not discharged the onus of establishing that the Respondent intentionally failed to comply with the Order or made no reasonable attempt to comply with the Order – Application dismissed.

  • Benson & Benson [2018] FamCA 270

    24 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – JURISDICTION – where order not relating to property in existence – where order a nullity – enforcement not appropriate where original order a nullity

  • Belperio & Vazouras [2018] FamCA 240

    18 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – where the only significant asset is the proceeds of sale of the former matrimonial home - where the wife seeks an adjustment of 20 per cent in her favour and the husband seeks an equal division of the asset pool - where the wife was awarded an overall adjustment of 15 per cent, with a 5 per cent adjustment for her greater contribution and a 10 per cent adjustment in consideration of her role as primary carer of an autistic child - where the overall division of assets was 65 per cent to the wife and 35 per cent to the husband.

  • Bane & Thompson [2018] FamCA 263

    27 Apr 2018

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives and spends time – With whom a child communicates – Parental responsibility – Presumption of equal shared parental responsibility – Where the litigation has been ongoing for a number of years – Best interests of a child – The weight to give to the child’s expressed views – Where there is significant acrimony between the parties – Where it is unlikely that the parties could effectively co-parent – Where there have been difficulties with handover arrangements – Meaningful relationship