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.

  • Lorde & Chu [2017] FamCA 866

    01 Nov 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – where contravention of orders without reasonable excuse

  • Hobson & Hobson [2017] FamCA 840

    23 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – INJUNCTIONS – Where the wife sought interlocutory injunctions for the preservation of assets and that the husband provide better disclosure in relation to his business activities – Where the wife contended that the husband had failed to comply with orders that he disclose documents to verify his share trading and that the husband has failed account for the application of proceeds arising out of various stock sales – Where the wife contends that there is a real risk that the reduction of the husband’s share portfolio will adversely impact upon the wife by depleting the parties’ available property for distribution – Where the husband denied failing to make proper disclosure but accepted that there had been instances where proper source documents had not been provided – Where the husband’s reduction in his share portfolio represents 16.26 per cent of the parties’ current net property – Court finds that if the reduction in the husband’s share portfolio continues at its current rate there is a real risk it will reduce the net property available for distribution between the parties at final hearing where the wife’s interests may be prejudiced – interlocutory injunctions granted – orders made for the husband to provide better disclosure to prevent frustration of the court process – orders made requiring the husband to open specific bank accounts into which the proceeds of share trading activities will be deposited and disbursed with the wife to have access for information purposes only.

  • Chalmers & Ting (No. 2) [2017] FamCA 744

    22 Sep 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental responsibility – Consideration of whether the Court should depart from the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility – Where parties are unable to agree regarding the children’s health – Where the parties have varied approaches to parenting – Where it is in the best interest of the child for the mother to have sole parental responsibility.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Spend time with – Where children live with father and spend regular time with mother – Where children previously lived with mother – Where children would benefit from a relationship with both parents – Where both parents seeks primary care orders – Where the Court finds it is appropriate for the children to live with the mother and spend 5 nights a fortnight with the father.
  • Neubert & Neubert and Ors [2017] FamCA 903

    09 Nov 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PUBLICATION ORDER – Application for permission to publish account of determination of a proceeding – Orders made for the publication, in all forms of media, of a fair and accurate report of the judgment of the Court published 18 October 2017 and this judgment shall have the names of the parties included.

  • Tennant & Tennant [2017] FamCA 839

    11 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where the Husband is to transfer the proceeds of his bank account to the parties’ joint account – Where the Husband is granted sole use and occupancy of the property – Where the Husband is granted sole responsibility for the management of the businesses – Where the Wife is restrained from fettering the Husband’s management of the businesses – Where the Husband is to make weekly payments to himself and to the Wife from the joint bank account.

  • Sutherland & Sutherland [2017] FamCA 856

    27 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Final orders – Where the parties have settled the substantial proceedings by consent – Where the matters outstanding relate to children’s handover and the duration of overseas travel and school holidays – Where orders made that resolve the outstanding matters with the paramount consideration the best interests of the children.

  • Summers & Rendel [2017] FamCA 855

    18 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim orders – Spend time with – Consideration of best interests of the child – Consideration of report by child’s psychologist – Orders made for the child to spend two nights in each three week period until the final hearing – Where further consideration given to the child travelling overseas with the father – Where the parties are agreed to the child travelling overseas – Where orders made by consent permitting the father to travel overseas with the child

  • Sorrel & Cutten [2017] FamCA 838

    20 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Adjournment – where trial not ready to proceed notwithstanding months of lead-in time – whether mother seeks adjournment because her case not prepared as she would want it.

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where adjournment necessitates oral application for interim orders – where consideration given to substantial background to five years of litigation.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – where mother opposes costs order – order made.

  • Seaward & MacDuff [2017] FamCA 848

    13 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where the father seeks orders that he spend supervised time with the children, progressing to unsupervised time, equal shared parental responsibility and that the children engage in therapy – Where the children, aged 12 and 13, have expressed the view that they do not want to see their father – Where the father alleges the mother has alienated the children from him – Where the parties’ adult child is estranged from the father – Where each parent has demonstrated a lack of insight as to the effect of their actions on the children – Where it is not in the best interests of the children to make orders compelling them to spend time with their father – No order made for the children to spend time with the father – Orders made for the mother to have sole parental responsibility – Orders made for the father to send letters to the children and for the mother to send the father updates about the children – Orders made for the children to attend counselling. 

    FAMILY LAW – EVIDENCE – Application by the father to rely on a report of an expert psychologist, not in relation to the psychological health of the father – Where the report related solely to a critique of the family report – Where no leave had been granted pursuant to rule 15.49 to rely on an adversarial expert – Where the father was not granted leave to tender the report.

  • Picton & Crowley [2017] FamCA 811

    12 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – FAMILY VIOLENCE – Where there are extensive concerns raised by the father and paternal grandmother of the child’s safety in the mother’s care – Where the father and paternal grandmother have made numerous complaints to FACS, police and doctors concerning the welfare of the child – Where no allegations have been substantiated – Where there is significant and entrenched conflict between the parents  – Consideration of s 60CC factors – Where the parenting capacity of both parents is a concern – Where there cannot be a shared care arrangement due to the conflict between the parents – Orders are made for the child to live with the mother and spend no time with the father – Orders made restraining the father from coming into contact with the mother or child.

  • Patrick & Riley [2017] FamCA 849

    26 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom the child lives – Where the child has a more meaningful relationship with the father than with the mother – Where the child presently lives with the father and spends time with the mother, though not substantial amounts of time – Where the father’s concern is the child’s safety in the mother’s care should she relapse into drug and alcohol abuse – Where the mother genuinely wishes to remain abstinent from drug and alcohol abuse – Where the mother shall undertake drug and alcohol testing as a condition of the child spending time with her – Where the mother’s partner agrees to undertake drug and alcohol testing, even though not a party to the proceedings – Where the father understands the importance of the child’s relationships with the maternal family – Concluded the child live with the father and the parties have equal shared parental responsibility for her

  • Newton and Anor [2017] FamCA 842

    16 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW– Application to commence adoption proceedings– biological father unknown – applicants have been in a long-term relationship – application considered to be in child’s best interest – application granted.

  • Newport & Newport and Ors (No. 2) [2017] FamCA 853

    18 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where an objection was made to the ongoing cross-examination of the mother on one particular issue concerning family violence – Where the mother appeared visibly distressed during cross-examination – Where the cross-examination in relation to the issue of family violence had been ongoing in excess of a day of hearing – Where the father disputes the allegation of family violence and consequently contended that there is a reasonable basis for the questioning of the mother – Where in those circumstances the Court permitted the cross-examination to occur – Consideration of Family Violence Best Practice Principles in relation to vulnerable witnesses – Courts permits the cross-examination to continue – objection dismissed.

  • Moller & Moller [2017] FamCA 841

    23 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Where the husband currently pays the majority of the children’s expenses – Where the wife currently receives $2,300 from the husband each week – Where the husband is currently making all mortgage and loan repayments – Where the husband must be taken to concede that the wife is unable to support herself adequately as he seeks orders that he pay spousal maintenance – Where the husband has the capacity to pay spousal maintenance – Where the wife is not entitled to be maintained to the same standard of living as the parties enjoyed prior to separation – Where the wife has the care of the parties’ two school aged children – Where the wife has the capacity to work – Where $700 per week is adequate to cover the wife’s personal expenses in addition to the costs currently paid by the husband – Orders made as sought by the husband.

  • Millicott & Millicott [2017] FamCA 826

    16 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best Interests – Where both parties are self-represented – Where there are allegations of family violence – Where there are allegations of substance misuse – Where the  child has not seen the father for a significant period of time – Where the child was previously spending supervised time with the father – Where the father has perpetrated family violence against the mother in the presence of the child – Where the father has not sought to change his behaviour – Where the father behaved inappropriately at final hearing – Where there are ongoing concerns for the safety of the mother – Where the father has not put forward a proposal to mitigate concerns about his behaviour – Orders made for the mother to have sole parental responsibility and for the father to spend no time with the child.  

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Just and Equitable – Where both parties are self-represented – Where there is a lack of evidence before the court – Where the husband has failed to make full disclosure – Where the only asset for distribution is the former family home – Where the husband made a significant financial contribution of $250,000 to the property – Where the wife’s financial and non-financial contributions are otherwise greater than the husband’s – Where the wife’s contributions were made more arduous by the husband’s perpetration of family violence – Where an adjustment in favour of the husband is warranted for contributions to the property – Where the husband used a significant amount of joint funds as his own following separation – Where the husband’s current financial assets and position are not clear – Where the wife will have the care of the parties’ child for the foreseeable future without assistance from the husband – Where the wife’s superannuation is likely to be much less than the husband’s – Where an adjustment in favour of the wife is warranted for section 75(2) factors – Orders made for the former family home to be sold and for the wife to be trustee for sale.

  • Meng & Gong and Anor [2017] FamCA 846

    13 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM – Where the Wife is granted sole use and occupation of the former matrimonial home – Where an injunction is granted requiring the second respondent company to take steps to permit the Wife to have access to the former matrimonial home.

  • Martinelli & De Luca [2017] FamCA 830

    18 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – JURISDICTION – De facto relationship – whether a de facto relationship existed between the parties – Where the wife seeks no division of property under s 90SM Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – where neither party argued there was no de facto relationship – Where the Court made a declaration of a de facto relationship existed from January 2000 until 12 June 2013.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Appropriateness of an alteration of property interests – Just and equitable – De facto relationship – Where the wife contends that the parties’ held their assets separately and did not intermingle their finances – Where the focus is on the contributions of the parties – Where the Court held that the parties did intermingle their finances – Where the wife was only able to repay loans because of the financial input of the husband and the income generated by his business – Where it is just and equitable to make an alteration of property interests of the parties.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Alteration of property interests – Where the conduct of the parties created complexities – Where the Court determined a global approach would achieve a just and equitable alteration of property interest – Where notwithstanding the misappropriation of monies by the wife from the husband’s business the wife made the greater contribution to the conservation and improvement of the parties’ assets – Court ordered adjustment of property in favour of wife.

  • Loomis [2017] FamCA 852

    27 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Leave to file an Application in a Case – Whether the applicant should be granted leave to file an Application in a Case – Where the hearing of the substantive application has been completed and judgment is reserved – Where the applicant seeks to re-open the evidence and join two third parties to the proceedings – Application dismissed.

  • Khalid & Khalid [2017] FamCA 854

    24 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Whether parent constitutes risk to the child – Where child was withheld

  • Jolly & Minton [2017] FamCA 837

    20 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – with whom a child lives – with whom a child spends time – with whom a child communicates – allegations of violence – mental health issues involving father – whether the father’s mental health poses an unacceptable risk to the children in the unsupervised care of the father – whether father poses an unacceptable risk given the alleged history of family violence – Orders that father spend supervised time with the children with such time to be supervised by the paternal grandparents

  • Goen & Sinna [2017] FamCA 857

    16 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Dispute as to appropriate forum – Where a previous determination has been made that the child is habitually resident in Australia under the Hague Convention – Where there are current proceedings on foot in State C, United States of America – Where the father seeks that any parenting proceedings be determined in State C – Where the father submits there is greater cost and delay in Australia – Where the father claims his meaningful relationship with the child is hindered by proceedings being continued in Australia – Where the mother seeks that parenting proceedings continue in Australia – Where concerns raised by the father as to the mother’s mental health – Where the delay and cost of proceedings in Australia unlikely to be greater in Australia than State C – Where the mother’s mental health could be negatively affected by her returning to State C – Where the mother returning to State C could be detrimental to the child – Where the father’s meaningful relationship with the child is not hindered by proceedings being continued in Australia – Where the best evidence as to the mother’s mental health is in Australia – Where the appropriate forum for resolving parenting disputes is usually the child’s place of habitual residence – Where it is in the best interests of the child for the matter to be determined in Australia.

  • Fadley & Southwell and Ors [2017] FamCA 844

    05 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the orders are made be consent discharging the single expert from valuing philatelic material – Where a new single expert is appointed to value the philatelic material – Where that single expert is to attend the vaults alone for the purposes of undertaking his role as single expert.

  • Darley & Darley (No. 4) [2017] FamCA 850

    25 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – When the children are to spend time with the father – Where the final hearing was part heard – Where interim orders were sought to be made to deal with the time between now and February 2018 – Where the court ordered the Father spend some specific weekend and holiday time with the children.

  • Darley & Darley (No. 3) [2017] FamCA 827

    13 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – ORDERS – Contravention

  • Auton & Kalben [2017] FamCA 843

    06 Sep 2017

    FAMILY LAW – STAY APPLICATION – existence of parallel proceedings – stay granted, anti-suit injunction refused

  • Akhtari & Alghazari [2017] FamCA 820

    31 Aug 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – EVIDENCE – Where the wife is seeking a certificate under s 128 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) for evidence in chief – Where authorities state that a certificate can be issued for evidence in chief – Certificate is issued.

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTION – Where it is ex parte – Where the wife seeks an injunction pursuant to s 114 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where there is reference in the documents to threats or threatening behaviour from the husband and risks associated with people associated with him – Where the balance of prejudice favours granting of the application.

  • Akhtari & Alghazari (No. 2) [2017] FamCA 748

    25 Sep 2017

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTIONS – Interim – Where the husband does not oppose the continuation of orders previously made for the wife’s personal protection.

    FAMILY LAW – EXCLUSIVE OCCUPATION – Interim – Where the wife seeks exclusive occupation of the parties’ investment property but the husband seeks that she and the parties’ two young children return to and occupy the former matrimonial home – Where the wife should have the ability to choose which occupancy is more suitable for her given she has the primary care of the parties’ two children; it is unclear what time the children will spend with the husband and she has chosen the property of lower value – Where the wife seeks orders for interim property settlement – Where there is no obvious source of funds which would enable the husband to pay the wife the amount she seeks – Where it is appropriate to make an order for the sale of the former matrimonial home on the basis that the mortgage be discharged and each party receive the same amount from the proceeds of sale with the balance placed in a controlled monies account.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Interim – Where the wife seeks an order for periodic spousal maintenance together with an order that the husband pay the mortgages and outgoings on the parties’ two properties – Where the wife satisfies the threshold test and has a need – Where the husband has a capacity to pay – Where the wife is entitled to the spousal maintenance order she seeks.

  • Neubert (Deceased) & Neubert and Anor (No. 2) [2017] FamCA 829

    18 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Application for a property settlement by the wife – Where wife was killed by the husband after filing but prior to the final hearing – Where wife was substituted as a party to the proceedings by her personal legal representative for her Estate

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where the husband initially sought orders that there be a division of property to the late wife’s Estate whereas he receive 80 per cent and the late wife’s Estate receive 20 per cent but later sought an equal division of the assets – Consideration of s 79(8) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Court satisfied that s 79(8) requirements are met in circumstances where to decline to make an order would reward the party who had killed the other party to the proceedings - Orders made where the parties assets should be divided 35 per cent to the Estate of the late wife and 65 per cent as to the husband – Order that the husbands share of the parties assets be paid directly to the intervenor to be set off against the judgment debt arising from the Supreme Court proceedings – Consideration of whether there should be any s 75(2) adjustment – Given the death of the late wife there were no s 75(2) adjustments to be made in her favour

  • Grant & Aiden (No 2) [2017] FamCA 833

    01 Sep 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – where the mother filed an Application in a Case while the trial was part-heard seeking various procedural and interim substantive orders – where the Court adjourned the hearing of the application on the mother’s application, but only for one day – where the mother’s application was devoid of merit and was dismissed – where the father and the Independent Children’s Lawyer both then sought costs orders against the mother – where the mother is ordered to pay the father’s costs on a party/party basis – where the respondent mother’s impecuniosity is not a bar to a costs order against her – where the costs application of the Independent Children’s Lawyer was dismissed

  • Simon & Edward [2017] FamCA 836

    19 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application for expedited hearing

  • Hillman & Hillman (No 3) [2017] FamCA 835

    19 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Contravention – Where the father alleges two counts of contravention against the mother – Where the mother concedes she contravened the Orders but had a reasonable excuse to do so – Application dismissed

  • Grant & Aiden (No 3) [2017] FamCA 834

    31 Aug 2017

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – where the applicant father sought a costs order against the respondent mother following dismissal of her Application-Contempt against him – where the respondent mother is ordered to pay the applicant father’s costs on a party/party basis – where the respondent mother’s impecuniosity is not a bar to a costs order against her

  • Walters & Walters and Anor (No 2) [2017] FamCA 832

    19 Sep 2017

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – OBJECTION TO SUBPOENA – Where application for costs as against a third party objector to a subpoena for production issued by the wife – Where objection was previously dismissed – Where consideration of general principles – Where proper for order for costs to be made.

  • Pember & Bryson [2017] FamCA 831

    13 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Costs order made.

  • Simpson & Lien [2017] FamCA 828

    11 Sep 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – interim proceedings – interim injunction  – application to restrain wife from selling or dealing with property – application in a case – injunction granted.

  • Lennon & Lennon and Ors [2017] FamCA 825

    16 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – where trustee in bankruptcy of the husband agrees that orders should be made and there is no dispute about the justice and equity issues.  As between the husband and wife relating to superannuation interests, the husband did not attend or participate in any way and there is ample evidence to suggest that the husband should have no interest in the wife’s superannuation entitlements for the future.  Orders made.

  • Farina & Naima (No 3) [2017] FamCA 824

    09 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – the Applicant seeks costs in relation to the final property settlement aspect of the proceedings – Application granted.

  • Barlow & Jarman (No 2) [2017] FamCA 823

    16 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS

  • Cardozo & Taverna [2017] FamCA 819

    13 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM – Where the wife seeks that a jointly owned property be sold – Where orders are made for the wife to be restrained from selling the property without first giving notice to the husband.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Application by the wife, aged 67, for interim spousal maintenance – Where the husband asserts the wife does not meet the test in s 72 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where the wife has significant health problems and is unable to support herself – Where the husband is found to have capacity to pay spousal maintenance – Order made for the husband to pay the wife $1,500 per week by way of spousal maintenance.


  • Catlin & Catlin [2017] FamCA 818

    13 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Final orders – Spousal maintenance – Where wife seeks payment of spousal maintenance pursuant to a binding financial agreement – Where husband claims set offs – Consideration of whether there is a set off – Where partial set offs allowed in respect of the children’s health insurance and conveyancing costs – Where set offs not allowed in respect of a swimming pool fence and speculative audit fees – Where wife further claims monies in respect of outgoings relating to the former home paid by her – Where it is appropriate for the Court to enforce interest on spousal maintenance arrears – Where Court adjusts the amount of spousal maintenance payable to the wife – Where an order is made for the husband to pay spousal maintenance to the wife – Application upheld.

  • Bellus & Bellus and Anor [2017] FamCA 817

    13 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim orders – Interim distribution of property – Where wife seeks an interim distribution of property – Consideration of ‘procedural’ and ‘substantive’ steps prior to an interim distribution – Where it is appropriate to make an interim distribution of property in favour of the wife – Where the parties are otherwise restrained from disposing or assigning assets of the company – Application allowed.

  • Bakal & Kapicic [2017] FamCA 816

    13 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – Where the mother alleges the father failed to comply with parenting orders without reasonable excuse – where the mother pleas two counts where the father failed to make the child available to spend time with her – where in defence the father admits the contravention but pleas a reasonable excuse – Consideration of the father’s excuse –where the count is proven without reasonable excuse – where the proceedings are listed for sentencing submissions.

  • Webster & Webster (No 3) [2017] FamCA 815

    22 Sep 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where the parties agree the children should live with the mother and that she should have sole parental responsibility for them – Where the dispute was limited to the extent of holiday time the children should spend with the father and whether this time should occur overseas – Where the father resides in the United Kingdom – Where there is a risk the father will retain the children overseas in contravention of orders – Concluded that although the risk of retention may not be as pronounced as the mother fears, the repercussions are potentially serious – Order restraining the father from removing the children from Australia

  • Wallace & Wallace [2017] FamCA 814

    12 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim orders – Live with – Spend time with – Where the mother seeks an order that the children live with her – Where the father seeks a suspension of the mother’s time with the children – Where there is a final intervention order in place listing the father and children as protected persons against the mother – Where the father concedes the mother poses no risk to the children – Consideration of the best interests of the children – Where it is ordered that the mother’s time with the children be increased to five nights per fortnight – Where given the risks to the children associated with inter-parental conflict it is appropriate to expedite the proceedings.

  • Wei & Xia and Ors (No 2) [2017] FamCA 813

    29 Jun 2017

    FAMILY LAW – INTERLOCUTORY – Injunctions – Preservation of property – Where the applicant seeks injunctions in relation to four corporations – Where the husband acquired interest in one corporation after separation – Concluded injunctive relief will only apply to three of the corporations – Where the third and fourth respondents assert their proprietary entitlement to extract capital from the commercial entities – Where the extraction of capital will prejudice the wife’s rights and entitlements in the proceedings – Concluded the wife has established her entitlement to injunctive relief

    FAMILY LAW – INTERLOCUTORY – Spousal maintenance – Where both parties depose to expenditure well above their means – Where the husband has no apparent capacity to pay spousal maintenance – Where the parties have sufficient equity in real property that can be used to meet their respective needs – Concluded there is no option but for the parties to use their own capital to support themselves


  • Slynt & Slynt [2017] FamCA 812

    04 Sep 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child spends time – Family violence – Where the child has no meaningful relationship with the father – Whether the child would benefit from an attempt to manufacture a relationship with the father – Where the risk of harm the father poses to the mother and child by subjection or exposure to family violence is high enough to justify the preclusion of any interaction between them – Where the father’s evidence betrayed the absence of any real contrition and the failure to comprehend the scale of his abhorrent behaviour – Concluded the child’s best interests demand peace and tranquillity in the mother’s house – Ordered the child lives with the mother and spends no time with the father

  • Maziar & Maziar [2017] FamCA 810

    15 Sep 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental responsibility – Where consent orders were made to settle the parties’ dispute about all issues other than the allocation of parental responsibility – Where the allocation of parental responsibility is the only issue requiring judicial determination – Where there are reasonable grounds to believe the mother, but quite possibly also the father, engaged in family violence – Where the parties cannot communicate effectively – Concluded the children’s best interests would not be served by an order for shared parental responsibility – Where the parties agreed the children should live with the mother – Ordered the mother have sole parental responsibility for all major long-term issues related to the children

  • Kent & Kent (No 3) [2017] FamCA 809

    29 Sep 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where the majority of the property of the parties is in Papua New Guinea – Where the Wife seeks to preserve remaining funds – Where the Husband is restrained from making further withdrawals from a superannuation fund in Papua New Guinea

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim –Where the Husband seeks an order that the Wife pay to the Husband half of the funds in her bank account – Application dismissed. 


  • Kilduff & Gros [2017] FamCA 808

    13 Sep 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom the child lives – Where the child has been in her brother’s primary care since her mother’s infirmity and subsequent death – Where the father seeks the child’s residence – Where both parties can meet the child’s physical and academic needs – Where the brother has shielded the child from his resentment of the father – Where the child’s relationship with the father has bloomed since the child has lived with the brother – Where the father’s commitment to support and promote the child’s relationship with the brother is not so clear – Concluded the father is not the favoured candidate for the child’s residence merely because of his paternity – Concluded a change in residence would necessitate a greater degree of confidence about the father’s parenting capacity then the evidence warrants – Ordered the child live with the brother and he have sole parental responsibility

  • Vittorio & Oliphant [2017] FamCA 802

    09 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – Where the wife sought orders in relation to litigation funding, partial property distribution and orders to compel the husband to pay her private health insurance – Where the Court is not satisfied that an order for costs should be made pursuant to section 117(1) of the Act – Where the husband has the capacity to sell a portion of his share portfolio in order to raise funds to satisfy a partial property distribution order – Orders made for the husband to pay to the wife the sum of $34,800 by way of partial property distribution – Orders made granting the parties liberty to apply on seven days’ notice to the other party and the Court in regards to the wife’s application for the husband to pay her private health insurance.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE  – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – Where the wife sought orders for urgent spousal maintenance and interim spousal maintenance – Where the wife does not have any children and receives a gross income of $210,000  – Where there is no evidence that the wife is suffering from any disability – Court finds that in relation to urgent spousal maintenance the wife has not established that her indebtedness has given rise to an immediate need for financial assistance in terms of section 77 of the Act – Court finds that in relation to interim spousal maintenance the wife has not satisfied the requirement set out in section 72(1) of the Act – Both applications for urgent and interim spousal maintenance dismissed.


  • Butters & Butters [2017] FamCA 801

    11 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – Where the father sought to vary the current interim orders so that the children live with the father and spend time with the mother under “light” supervision – Where the father contends that there has been a change in circumstances in relation to all three children and raised concern in relation to the mother’s parenting capacity – Court finds that there is no justification for revisiting previous parenting orders that currently apply to the two youngest children – Court finds that it would not be appropriate for the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility to be applied in these interim proceedings – Where the eldest child has expressed a reluctance to return to her mother’s care – Where there are concerns that the eldest child would run away in the event that she is forced to return to her mother’s care  – Where there are concerns the eldest child may be alienated from the mother if not returned to her mother’s care – Court finds that there is an unacceptable risk that the child would be exposed to emotional distress and potentially psychological harm in being required to resume living with her mother  – Orders made for the child to remain living with the father and for time with the mother to resume on a graduated basis – Orders made for the children to continue therapy.

  • Bahar & Sohrab (No 6) [2017] FamCA 792

    05 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

  • French & Gilbey [2017] FamCA 790

    02 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – s 69ZT consideration

  • Riemann & Riemann and Ors [2017] FamCA 788

    04 Oct 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PROCEDURAL – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – Where the wife has retained new solicitors – Where the wife now seeks to amend her application to challenge a transaction and to join third parties – Whether the wife has impliedly waived legal professional privilege in respect to communications with her previous and current solicitors – Whether the husband is required to comply with an obligation agreed to in previous orders to identify and provide documents to which he claims legal professional privilege – Court finds that the wife has waived legal professional privilege in respect to the subject matter of communications contained in an affidavit and also in written submissions – Court finds that the husband should not be required to incur additional expense in providing documents which are not relevant to the proceedings and which he is not otherwise required to provide pursuant to Part 13 of the Family Law Rules 2004.

  • Guzniczak & Rogala [2017] FamCA 758

    19 Sep 2017

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Application filed by husband seeking residence of children – Where husband seeks orders that children spend time with the wife - Where husband seeks orders for sole parental responsibility of the children including their health and education – Where communication between the parties in relation to matters involving the children is poor – Where there is a high level of conflict between the husband and wife - Allegations of family violence – Orders that children live with the mother – Orders that children shall spend time with or live with the father as agreed and failing that as provided for in the Orders – Orders that children be able to communicate with the parent when they are not in their care – Injunctive Orders – Orders in respect of travel and the issue of passports for the children

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Application for an adjustment of property interests – Where husband and wife were married for almost 11 and have two children – Where husband contributions were greater than the wife – Where the husband inherited a half interest in a property post separation


  • Nagel (Deceased) & Nagel and Anor [2017] FamCA 751

    27 Apr 2017

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Application by Legal Personal Representative and Intervener for orders regarding the sale of property and distribution of funds in Australia and internationally – Application for money held in trust by the husband’s solicitors and property held by the husband’s power of attorney to be paid to the applicant’s solicitors – Application granted