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.

  • Garvey & Jess [2016] FamCA 445

    07 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – FINANCIAL AGREEMENT – Whether financial agreement void for uncertainty – Whether parties entered into an “agreement to agree” – Where the agreement provides for the division of future, joint assets – Where the agreement requires joint assets be divided equally – Application dismissed.

  • Kemal & Sukuraman [2016] FamCA 444

    06 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – RELOCATION ORDER – Whether relocating to India is in the best interests of the child - Whether the child should spend time with the father – Whether the father is able to care for the child – Whether the parties should have equal shared parental responsibility of the child - Where the mother wishes to relocate to India with the child – Where the child suffers from Autism Spectrum Disorder–Where the mother has support of maternal grandparents in India – Where the mother would relocate without the child.

  • Padley & Padley [2016] FamCA 443

    06 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – With whom a child spends time – Best interests of child – Where there is one child of the marriage – Where the Court orders the child to live with the mother and spend time with the father

  • Ahmed & Jeret [2016] FamCA 442

    06 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – Best interests of child – Where there are two children of the relationship – Where the Court orders the mother has sole parental responsibility – Where the Court orders the children live with the mother and spend time with the father

  • Ingram & Ingram [2016] FamCA 441

    18 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Where it became apparent that the father was contemplating not participating to any extent in the final hearing – Where the father was given the opportunity to attend and listen to the proceedings by telephone – Where although it was too late for the father to be an active participant, he did not take up that opportunity to attend and listen by telephone – Where the proceedings proceeded on an undefended basis

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best Interests – Where the parties have three children – Where the oldest is an adult – Where the mother’s application relates to only two of the parties’ children – Where presently the second oldest child lives in the USA with the father and the youngest child lives in Australia with the mother – Where it was agreed that the youngest child should continue to live with the mother and that older child should continue to live with the father in the USA – Where the children have meaningful relationships with both parents – Children’s views – Where given the evidence, it would be counter-productive to make an order forcing the youngest child to travel, which has the potential to be destructive of his relationship with the father – Both children to spend time with their other parent and siblings during school holiday periods in both Australia and the USA

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental Responsibility – Where the mother proposed that the parents should share equally in parental responsibility for each of the children – Where it is certainly an appropriate course given the history of the matter – Parties to have equal shared parental responsibility

  • Hawkins & Hawkins [2016] FamCA 440

    03 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Twelve year marriage and no children – husband made substantial initial capital contribution – Where 10 years elapsed between parties’ final separation and trial whilst wife pursued Supreme Court litigation of what were ultimately found to be “baseless” claims – Where wife unilaterally acted to obtain substantial funds secured against the former matrimonial home to fund litigation – Where wife spent $634,000 on Supreme Court litigation and caused the husband to spend $235,000 – Wife solely responsible for economic consequences of Supreme Court litigation – Where 10 years post-separation period and events to be considered – Assessment of contributions in 12 year marriage and 10 years post-separation – Notional add backs – Post-separation liabilities excluded from notional pool considered in determining adjustment – 60/40 apportionment in husband’s favour for contribution – Section 75(2) factors and adjustment – Just and equitable orders

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Lump sum spousal maintenance

  • Short &Turlison [2016] FamCA 439

    27 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Recovery order sought by father – Order made

  • Ghazel & Ghazel [2016] FamCA 438

    30 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application for costs – Application dismissed

  • Re: Jerry [2016] FamCA 437

    23 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Medical procedure

  • Gibson & Killen (No 3) [2016] FamCA 436

    03 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD – FINAL PARENTING ORDERS – Best interests – applicant mother and Independent Children’s Lawyer seeking final orders on an undefended basis – where the evidence is untested – order made that the mother have sole parental responsibility – order that the child live with the mother and spend no time with the father.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Procedural fairness – where the father has failed to comply with orders – where the father has failed to attend court – where procedural fairness has been afforded to the father and no proposals are made by the father.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – where costs of mother and Independent Children’s Lawyer previously fixed and reserved to trial – circumstances justifying order – father ordered to pay fixed costs.

  • Commissioner of Taxation & Hong and Anor [2016] FamCA 435

    19 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim injunction restraining parties from dealing with property- Applicant seeking to set aside financial agreement entered into by the Respondents

  • Small & Small [2016] FamCA 433

    02 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – where the parties are in dispute as to the parenting arrangements of the children – where it has been a significant period of time since the father spent any time with the children – where the mother alleges a history of domestic violence and sexual abuse perpetrated by the father against her and the children – where the father denies the allegations – where it is ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility and that the children live with her – where the father’s application is dismissed.

  • Buller & Martin [2016] FamCA 434

    30 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for a Stay of the Order – Application Dismissed

  • Malone & Malone and Ors [2016] FamCA 432

    02 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – interim orders – where the wife seeks orders for the sale of property in addition to interests and funds to be transferred – where the application is opposed by the husband and second and third respondent – where the dispute is a matter of evidence and determination and therefore cannot be dealt with on an interim hearing – where the wife’s application is dismissed – where it is ordered that a single expert be appointed to value the said property.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – interim orders – where the wife seeks an increase in spousal maintenance – where the order is opposed by the husband – where the Court finds that the husband does not have the capacity to pay spousal maintenance in the sum sought by the wife – where the wife’s application is dismissed.

  • Herman & Bosley [2016] FamCA 431

    25 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – JURISDICTION – Consideration of principles – Whether local forum is “clearly inappropriate” – Recognition or enforcement of the other’s orders and decrees – Resolution of the parties’ controversy – Order and stage of local and foreign proceedings – Connection to each jurisdiction – Cost, delay and practical impediments to the conduct of proceedings in Australia – Not satisfied that the Family Court of Australia is a clearly inappropriate forum.

  • Festa & Comer [2016] FamCA 430

    02 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – where the parties are in dispute as to the parenting arrangements of the child – where the father alleges the mother suffers from a long history of mental illness and therefore she is a risk to the child – where of recent date the mother’s time with the child has been subject to supervision – where the Court finds that the mother’s mental health is not in and of itself a barrier to the mother having a relationship with the child – where there is no evidence to suggest the child is at risk of physical harm – where orders are made for the child to live with the father and for him to have sole parental responsibility – where the mother is required to undertake therapy and upon successful completion the child’s time with the mother shall be reinstated.

  • Corla & Tebello [2016] FamCA 429

    02 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – PARENTING ORDERS – where father poses an unacceptable risk of harm – where presumption of equal shared responsibility does not apply – where sole parental responsibility order in favour of the wife – where cultural and religious beliefs have an impact on the child’s best interest – where relationship with the child is outweighed by the negative aspects and experiences which she feels – where father currently resides overseas – where father will communicate and spend time with child as agreed between the parents – where the father will travel to Australia to spend time with the child as agreed between the parents – where father sought to have the assistance of an interpreter – whether father has not shown any signs of difficulty comprehending the communications – where this is the first court event he has requested an interpreter – where father declined to cross-examine any witnesses.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – permanent resident of Australia – where mother seeks father’s consent to the child becoming a permanent resident – where it is in the best interests of the child to have the right to travel overseas and return to Australia.

  • Alfarsi & Elhage [2016] FamCA 428

    02 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – JURISDICTION – Where both parents and children are Australian citizens – Where children were removed from Australia to Iraq by the father in September 2014 – Where agreed that children were habitually resident in Australia at the time of their removal – Where the father asserts that he does not know who is caring for the children in Iraq – 1996 Convention as implemented in the Family Law Act 1975 does not have application – Consideration of habitual residence of the children – Children have remained “habitually resident” in Australia – Satisfied the Court has jurisdiction.

  • Weaver & Maher [2016] FamCA 426

    02 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim Parenting – With whom the children live with – With whom the children spend time – Best interests of the children – Parents’ relationship was characterised by violence, drug use, illegal behaviour and personal conflict – Where the father filed an application for further interim parenting orders while judgment was reserved – Where three of the children have special needs – Where the children have significant relationships with both parents – Issues of risk in each household – Mother to undertake relevant parenting courses – Three eldest children to spend day time with the mother – Youngest child to continue to live with her mother and spend time with the father – Order of equal shared parental responsibility to continue.

  • Spiteri & Walker [2016] FamCA 425

    02 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim proceedings – Where final orders made by consent in 2013 – Where proceedings recommenced by the mother in 2014 –Where both parties seek sole parental responsibility and mother seeks changes to the younger child’s time with the father – Where no significant risk of harm – Where appropriate that parties retain equal shared parental responsibility pending final hearing – Where appropriate that there be no change to the younger child’s time with the father pending final hearing – Where interim orders made in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia restraining the children from engaging in SCUBA diving or other waterborne activities – Where father seeks the restraint to be lifted – Where mother has concerns about the children’s physical fitness for such activity by reason of a history of asthma – Where further medical testing has been recommended to determine the children’s suitability to participate in SCUBA diving and other waterborne activities – Where appropriate that the children undertake such testing.

  • Cotter & Cotter [2016] FamCA 424

    19 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – ENFORCEMENT - Where orders made by consent – Where wife seeks to set aside the orders under s 79A of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where husband seeks to enforce orders made by consent – Where self-executing orders made for the wife to file evidence in support of her application and should she fail to do so her application would stand dismissed – Where wife failed to file or provide to the Court documents as ordered and her application under s 79A was dismissed – Where orders made for husband to be authorised to act on behalf of both parties to give effect to consent orders in part – Where balance of husband’s application for enforcement and costs adjourned to a later date for hearing.

  • Re: Oliver [2016] FamCA 423

    31 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – MEDICAL PROCEDURES – Childhood gender dysphoria – Where the Court declares that the child is competent to consent to the administration of Stage 2 treatment.

  • Winters & McGuigan [2016] FamCA 421

    01 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – Best interests of child – Where there are two children of the marriage – Where the father alleges the mother has deliberately set out to alienate him from the children – Where the Court orders the father has sole parental responsibility for a year and thereafter the parents have equal shared parental responsibility – Where the Court orders the children live with the father and spend time with the mother

  • Walden & Walden [2016] FamCA 420

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim – Wife’s application for the parties to join in paying for an expert report – Where that application is opposed by the husband – Where the Court is of the view that it is not a proper joint expense – Where the wife is granted leave to adduce evidence of an expert that she retains.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Interim – Application for leave under s 44(3)of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) to commence proceedings for spousal maintenance out of time – Consideration of s 44(4) – Where the wife has not established a case for hardship – Application for leave under s 44(3) is dismissed.

  • White & West [2016] FamCA 419

    27 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the wife seeks that the husband pay her costs on an indemnity basis – Where the costs sought by the wife are in relation to an unsuccessful contravention application by the husband – Where the wife made an offer in writing to settle the contravention proceedings – Where the husband was wholly unsuccessful in his contravention application – Where the parties have been engaged in a long history of litigation – Where the Court is not persuaded that the circumstances warrant an indemnity costs order – Order made that the husband pay the wife’s costs as agreed or as assessed on a party and party basis.

  • McDuff & Seaward [2016] FamCA 416

    11 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – travel overseas – where the father opposes the mother’s application to travel with the children overseas – where the mother is permitted to travel to Asia with the children for a specified period of time – where the mother must ensure the children have appropriate hotel accommodation and do not travel to certain areas within Asia.

  • Kingston & Hiss [2015] FamCA 415

    30 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best interests – Where the children are at an unacceptable risk of emotional abuse in the mother’s care – Where the father has had sole parental responsibility of the children on an interim basis since trial – Where the mother’s time with the children is to be supervised until such time as agreed between the parties. 

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – De facto relationship – Where the mother denied the existence of a de facto relationship to receive Centrelink benefits – Whether just and equitable to make property adjustment orders – Where financial and non-financial contributions during relationship relatively equal – Where the father made a significant initial financial contribution – Where Registry manager ordered to send a copy of orders and reasons to Centrelink.

  • Dave & Karia [2016] FamCA 414

    12 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – NULLITY – where both parties seek a declaration that their marriage is null and void – where the parties are former citizens of India – where they allege to have been under immense pressure from their respective families and in fear of physical harm – where the parties alleged there was no real consent because the marriage was obtained under duress – where the Court finds the parties were not forced to marry – where the application is dismissed.

  • Persall & Lenahan [2016] FamCA 413

    27 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – With whom a child spends time – Parental responsibility – Father’s perpetration of family violence against the mother – Father’s drug use – Children’s exposure to the father’s aberrant conduct – Where the children cannot benefit from time with the father – Where there are significant risk factors in relation to the children spending time with the father – Children to live with the mother and spend no time with the father – Sole parental responsibility to be held by the mother.

  • Bass & Bass and Anor [2016] FamCA 412

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application in a Case – Applications for a stay of orders – Where the applications are in aid of an appeal – Where both applications are dismissed – Where costs of the applications are reserved pending the appeal – Where no evidence of the parties’ financial circumstances is adduced – Whether the applications were wholly unsuccessful – Whether an order for indemnity costs should be made – Where there are no exceptional circumstances which would justify an indemnity order – Where costs are ordered on a party and party basis – Where the father is ordered to indemnify the Child Support Trust against the costs and expenses of the case guardian.

  • Kapicic & Bakal [2016] FamCA 410

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – where the father seeks orders for sole parental responsibility and that the child live with him – where the orders are opposed by the mother – where the father is concerned as to the mother’s mental stability and considers her time with the child should be supervised – where the parties are in dispute as to the child’s health – where the Court finds that the mother’s allegations against the father are scandalous – where the ICL seeks an order that the mother undergo a course of therapy before she is permitted to spend time with the child – where the family consultant support orders in favour of the father – where it is ordered that the father have sole parental responsibility and that the child live with him and spend time with the mother each alternate weekend and during school holidays.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – final orders – where the father seeks a settlement sum – where the mother seeks to retain the former matrimonial home – where it is just and equitable to make an order for property settlement – where consideration is given to contributions – where the mother is required to pay the father a settlement sum.

  • Ferro & Kopel [2016] FamCA 409

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – where the wife seeks an order that she be permitted to relocate with the child to Israel – where the application is opposed by the husband – where the wife is not permitted to relocate – where the parties share parental responsibility but the wife has sole parental responsibility for the child’s education and health – where orders are made for the child to live with the mother and spend substantial and significant time with the father. 

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – final orders – where the husband seeks to retain the residential property – where both parties seek to retain their separate business enterprises – where consideration is given to the value of the assets including the businesses – where consideration is given to contributions including those of the husband’s family and where an adjustment is made in favour of the husband – where the overall adjustment creates a differential in favour of the wife – where the husband is required to pay the wife a settlement sum. 

    FAMILY LAW – JEWISH DIVORCE – where the wife seeks an order that the husband grant her a gett – where consideration is given to the constitutionality of such an order – where the Court does not consider it has the power to make the order sought.

  • Bardsley & Bardsley [2016] FamCA 408

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – Where the wife seeks periodic and lump sum spouse maintenance – Where the husband opposes the orders sought by the wife – Whether the wife is unable to support herself adequately for the purposes of section 72 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where the Court finds the wife is unable to support herself – Whether the husband has the capacity to pay spouse maintenance – Where the Court finds the husband has the capacity to pay periodic spouse maintenance but not lump sum spouse maintenance – Orders made for the husband to pay to the wife periodic spouse maintenance.

  • Miller & Schopenhaur [2016] FamCA 407

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parenting order – interim parenting orders – where mother asserts the father poses an unacceptable risk of sexual harm – where father accepts on an interim basis time should be supervised – where family members may be inappropriate supervisors – where briefing or training of family members will ameliorate any difficulties with family members supervising – where greater weight attached s60B than s60CC of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – where father conceded that presumption of equal shared parental responsibility is inappropriate at this stage – where presumption is not applied or rebutted, the Court is at large to consider what arrangements will best promote the child’s best interests having regard to the objects and principles in s 60B and the primary and secondary considerations in s 60CC.

  • Re Tara [2016] FamCA 406

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – MEDICAL PROCEDURES – Childhood gender dysphoria – Where the Court declares that the child is competent to consent to the administration of Stage 2 treatment.

  • Re: Sara [2016] FamCA 405

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – MEDICAL PROCEDURES – Childhood gender dysphoria – Where the Court declares that the child is competent to consent to the administration of Stage 2 treatment.

  • Selwood & Selwood and Ors (No 2) [2016] FamCA 404

    12 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – distribution of funds – calculations – where orders are made for the distribution of funds.

  • Selwood & Selwood and Ors [2016] FamCA 403

    12 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – joinder – where the Court finds that it is appropriate for the intervener to be joined.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – distribution of funds – where the wife seeks orders in relation to the distribution of funds received from the sale of a property – where the order is opposed by the husband and the intervener – where the matter is adjourned for further consideration of the amount payable to the parties.

  • Gervase & Gervase [2016] FamCA 402

    17 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – Competing applications – Where the wife seeks exclusive occupation of the former matrimonial home – Where the husband seeks exclusive occupation of the former matrimonial home and an investment property owned by the parties – Where the wife seeks that accrued, and future, rental income generated by the investment property be distributed equally between the parties – Where the husband seeks that the rental income be paid to him – Orders made for the husband to remain in the former matrimonial home and have exclusive occupation of the investment property – Orders made for the rental income to be distributed equally between the parties – Orders made for the husband to pay to the wife spousal maintenance.

  • Lin & Nicoll [2016] FamCA 401

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – validity of marriage – where the parties are of South East Asian descent – where the wife brings the application but it is opposed by the husband – where the marriage is valid and a divorce is granted.

  • Hutcheson & Meli [2016] FamCA 400

    25 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – relocation – where the mother seeks an order that she be permitted to relocate – where the father opposes the mother’s application – where the Court finds that the mother would suffer emotionally and psychologically if not permitted to relocate – where consideration is given to the benefit to the child of maintaining a meaningful relationship with both parents – where it is found that it is not in the child’s best interests for the parents to have equal shared parental responsibility – where the mother is permitted to relocate but is required to remain in Australia for a short period to enable the establishment of a relationship between the child and father – where the mother is required to provide security for the father’s travel to spend time with the child.

  • Fabre & Palmer and Anor [2016] FamCA 399

    04 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – FINAL ORDERS – Application by the maternal uncle that he and the mother have equal shared parental responsibility and that the child spend time with him two nights per week – no appearance by the father – where the father has been notified of the proceedings – where there is a history of domestic violence between the mother and the father – where the father is alleged to engage in the use or abuse of drugs – where the mother and the father have mental health issues – where the child has previously been placed with the maternal uncle on an interim accommodation order – where the mother consents to the orders – orders made as sought by the applicant

  • Cole & Cole [2016] FamCA 398

    11 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTION – INTERIM ORDERS – Application by the wife to restrain the husband from leaving the jurisdiction or from disposing with shares – where the purpose of the husband’s travel is not business related – where an undertaking is offered by the wife to meet any loss sustained by the husband due to a delay in his travel arrangements – orders made restraining the husband from leaving the jurisdiction or from disposing of shares for a limited period

  • Nakotoni & Murphy [2016] FamCA 397

    25 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best interests – With whom the child should live – Where the child is very young – Where the child had spent the majority of his life in the care of the mother – Orders made for the child to live with the mother and spend time with the father

  • Laws & Laws and Anor [2016] FamCA 396

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where the wife claims an injunction under s106B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)- where respondent seeks an adjournment of proceedings due to medical reasons – where applicant has to demonstrate there is a serious question to be tried – where balance of convenience favours grant of injunction – where wife claims the purpose of the transfer of shares was to defeat her claims – whether damages are an adequate remedy – where no statutory right to damages is created under that provision – where injunction granted – where respondent has liberty to apply to dissolve injunction on 48 hours’ notice. 

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where respondent seeks transfer of proceedings to the Federal Circuit Court – where s106B of the Family Law Act 1975(Cth) introduces complexity – where matter retained in the Family Court of Australia. 

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – where husband seeks the wife vacate the matrimonial home – where wife has paid to discharge present arears – where it is a matter of commercial judgement of the bank whether the property should be vacated. 

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parenting orders – where husband asserts no substantial matters are left in dispute – where magnitude of differences between the parties is not yet apparent – where it is premature in the proceedings to make an order

  • Tyson & Tyson [2016] FamCA 395

    04 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTIONS – INTERIM ORDERS – Application by the wife to restrain the husband from encumbering real property or from disposing of assets of a company – application neither opposed nor consented to by the husband – issue raised as to the husband’s capacity – orders conceded by the husband’s solicitor as appropriate – where the orders the wife seeks are to preserve the assets of the parties – orders made as sought by the wife

  • Allan & Allan [2016] FamCA 394

    24 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM ORDERS – Application by the husband for sale of real property and refinancing of a mortgage liability – where the husband seeks orders to alleviate his alleged financial difficulties – where there is no evidence to support the husband’s alleged financial difficulties – where the wife seeks to retain the real property sought to be sold by the husband as part of the final property settlement – where the orders proposed by the husband would result in him controlling assets representing a significant proportion of the pool of assets – application refused

  • Vancovich & Dunfield [2016] FamCA 393

    03 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Review of a Registrar’s decision to refuse to make orders by consent on the basis that s 81 was not satisfied – where the parties intend to continue to operate a business jointly – where the parties have both received independent legal advice – final orders made as sought by the parties

  • Dover & Rogers [2016] FamCA 392

    24 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – With whom a child communicates – With whom a child spends time – Allegations of sexual abuse – High level of conflict – Orders that children live with mother and spend time with the father

  • Starcevic & Watson [2016] FamCA 391

    23 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Family violence – standard of proof - definition of “unacceptable risk” - here greater weight attached s60B than s60CC of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) best interest of a child – best interests of the child balanced with perceived risk – mothers fear of husbands violence – where the mother has sole parental responsibility and an order that children spend no time nor communicate with father – where father disengaged from proceedings. 

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – where the father ordered to transfer his title and interest in matrimonial home – where mother indemnify the father in relation to the matrimonial home – whether it is just and equitable that the mother assume all of the parties net liability.

  • Judd & Cornell-Judd [2016] FamCA 390

    19 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Settlement in relation to marriage – Whether it is just and equitable – Identifying the existing interests – Where satisfied there is an outstanding joint liability to the wife’s father – Financial and non-financial contributions – Indirect financial contributions by the wife’s parents – Not satisfied the husband contributed financially by way of an inheritance as he contends– Husband’s conduct resulted in a diminution of the parties’ property pool to payments of debts – Where the wife has the future care and control of the children – Husband has greater income earning capacity and financial resources – Payment of child support uncertain – Husband’s non-disclosure – Greater contributions by the wife and further adjustment in favour of the wife.

  • Helms & Helms [2016] FamCA 389

    23 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Property Settlement – Application for deferral of property proceedings – Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s79(5) – change in financial circumstances – Where the trial Judge’s finding that a significant change within the period of the adjournment would be more likely to do justice as between the parties than an immediate order – where case management principles and the need for expeditious justice with the opportunity for parties to properly present their best case.

  • Strahan & Strahan [2016] FamCA 388

    20 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – trial directions – where the matter is adjourned for the purpose of making trial directions at a later date – where the parties have agreed to participate in private mediation.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – interim orders – where an order is made that the husband pays to the wife’s solicitors a sum for the purpose of payment of legal fees and disbursements – where the parties are required to file updated financial statements – where costs are referred to the trial judge.

  • McMillan & McMillan [2016] FamCA 387

    23 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – S105 Application for enforcement – application by the wife for enforcement of orders – consideration of the discretionary power of the Court to enforce orders pursuant to section 105 of the Family Law Act (Cth) 1975 – where the equitable bar of laches is not applicable – where delay per se does not readily excite equitable intervention – relevance of equitable defences – limitation periods for enforcement of judgement – limitation periods in relation to recovery of interest.

  • Fewster & Hyde [2016] FamCA 385

    10 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW - CHILDREN - Family violence – standard of proof - definition of “unacceptable risk” - here greater weight attached s60B than s60CC of the Family Law Act 1975(Cth) - where the mother has ceased spending time with the children - Where presumption to have equal shared parental responsibility rebutted.

  • Fielding & Doull [2016] FamCA 384

    23 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – CONTRAVENTION – where it is alleged the mother has failed to comply with Orders providing for the children’s time with their father and the exercise of shared parental responsibility – where the allegation of contravention is proved on two counts – where on the third count the mother made a reasonable attempt to comply with the orders of the court – findings of contravention – where the parties will be provided a further opportunity to make submissions as to sanction.

  • Bertram & Bertram [2016] FamCA 383

    20 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – where the parties live in different states – where significant weight is given to the wishes of the children – where it is ordered that the parties have shared parental responsibility but that the father have sole parental responsibility for matters relating to health and education affecting one child – where it is ordered that the children live with the father and spend time with the mother at such times to be agreed between the parties.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – final orders – where the husband seeks orders by way of property settlement – where the wife opposes the sale of one property – where consideration is given to contributions – where the wife is required to pay the husband a settlement sum – where various ancillary orders are made by way of property settlement.

  • Duarte & Morse [2016] FamCA 381

    28 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Contravention – Contravention application made by the mother against the father alleging a breach with respect to parenting orders – Where the mother seeks an order that the father be restrained from expressing concern about the risk posed to the children by the mother – Where the purpose of contravention proceedings pursuant to Division 13A is examined – Where the mother’s application is for an ulterior purpose – Application dismissed.

  • Padelford & Tsui [2016] FamCA 380

    20 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – Where the father seeks orders that he spend time with the child on a graduated basis, increasing to unsupervised overnight time – Where the mother seeks orders that the father’s time with the child be supervised for two hours per week –Where the child has cerebal palsy and has spent no time with the father in two years – Where there are disputed allegations of family violence – Presumption of equal shared parental responsibility not applied – Orders made for the child to live with the mother – Orders made for the father to spend supervised time with the child.

  • Grandhouse & Grandhouse [2016] FamCA 379

    20 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Summary dismissal – Application by the father for summary dismissal of the mother’s Initiating Application – Where the mother seeks to vary final parenting orders – Where the orders were subject to an appeal by the mother which was subsequently dismissed by the Full Court –Where the orders provided for the mother to seek a variation but subject to her meeting specific conditions –Where the Court finds that the mother has not provided any evidence as to her compliance with those orders – Where the Court finds the application has no reasonable likelihood of success and amounts to an abuse of process under rule 10.12 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) – Orders made summarily dismissing the mother’s Initiating Application.

  • Gregg & Gregg [2016] FamCA 378

    18 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim orders – where the mother has moved the children interstate – where consideration is given to the best interests of the children – where there is a psychologist report in relation to the mother – where the Court finds if the mother was ordered to return to South Australia there would be a risk to the mother’s wellbeing – where the Court orders holiday time in favour of the father.

  • Niven & Derrick [2016] FamCA 377

    20 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best Interests – Where there is a benefit to the child in having a meaningful relationship with both of his parents – Where the current parenting arrangement has become unworkable and intolerable for the child – Where there is a need to protect the child from psychological harm in the mother’s household – Children’s views – Sibling relationships – Where the mother wishes to relocate to the USA and there is a real risk she will not return with the child – Where given all the circumstances of the current matter, the mother has a limited capacity to meet the child’s emotional needs – Where the question becomes which of the parents is more likely to support the relationship with the other parent – Where on balance the father is the one who is likely to do so – Where there will be a positive impact on the child of a change of residence – Child to live with the father – Child to spend time with the mother during school holidays in Australia, following an initial embargo period 

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental Responsibility – Where the communication, consultation and compromise required for equal shared parental responsibility is an impossibility for these two parents – Where whichever parent the child lives with should exercise sole parental responsibility – Father to have sole parental responsibility

  • Lintz & Lintz and Ors [2016] FamCA 376

    31 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Financial proceedings - objection to subpoena issued at the behest of the husband to the parents of the wife – relevance of documents relating to the parents’ trusts – relevance of parents’ wills – objection not allowed.

  • Lake & Brand [2016] FamCA 375

    20 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – FINAL ORDERS – Asset pool – dispute as to the value of the husband’s interest in his family’s entities and debts alleged by him to be owed to the family entities – where one of the family entities was previously involved in the proceedings and discontinued its application just prior to the hearing – finding that the husband and his family have engaged in a course of action to defeat the wife’s claim 

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTIONS – Application by the wife for an injunction pursuant to s 90AE to restrain a third party company of which the husband is a director from instituting proceedings to recover a debt or from attempting to prove the existence of the debt – where the debt is alleged by the husband to be owed to the company – where the evidence does not support the existence of the alleged debt – injunction made restraining the company pursuant to s 90AF

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Waste – where the husband purchased a yacht just prior to separation – where the husband claimed after the commencement of proceedings that the children of the marriage have a 52 per cent share in the yacht – where the wife was not aware of husband vesting any interest in the yacht in the children and did not consent to that course of action – Kowaliw & Kowaliw (1981) FLC 91-092 considered – finding that the husband acted recklessly, negligently or wantonly dealt with matrimonial assets – waste by the husband taken into account pursuant to s 75(2)

  • Acharya & Bhatt [2016] FamCA 374

    27 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim – Spouse maintenance – Application by the wife for interim spousal maintenance – Where the wife lives in the former matrimonial home – Where the husband lives overseas – Where there is some evidence to suggest that the wife has mental health issues – Where the wife has demonstrated a need for financial assistance – Where the husband has some capacity to pay – Orders for spouse maintenance pending further order.

  • Senna & Jensen [2016] FamCA 373

    20 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – SEXUAL ABUSE – Best interests – Whether the children are at an unacceptable risk of sexual abuse in the father’s care – Where the children have made various consistent disclosures – Where the mother has attempted to facilitate a meaningful relationship between the children and their father.

  • Olmos & Morrall [2016] FamCA 372

    04 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for adjournment of a part heard hearing – Where counsel for the father is unavailable and need to brief other counsel – Where application opposed by mother – Where grounds for adjournment do not outweigh prejudice to the mother – Application dismissed

  • Edmund & Belkin [2016] FamCA 371

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – with whom the child lives – with whom the child spends time – where the child is eleven years old – where the mother has historically failed to facilitate and encourage a relationship between the child and her father – whether the mother is able to facilitate a relationship with the father into the future – where the child is ordered to live with her father and spend time with her mother – parental responsibility – where orders are made for equal shared parental responsibility.

  • Harris & Harris (No 3) [2016] FamCA 370

    13 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – ORDERS – variation following contravention application – where both parties seek a variation – where the Court considers it appropriate to make the variation – where orders are made for telephone contact between the children and the mother – where orders are made for the mother to spend time with one of the children subject to that child’s wishes.

  • Stenner & Stenner (No 3) [2016] FamCA 369

    17 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim orders – where the mother seeks orders in relation to the two children including for a change in living arrangements and a mental health care plan – where the father opposes the orders sought – where it is ordered that one child not attend at the handover of the other child – where the remainder of the orders sought are dismissed – where the question of costs is reserved to the trial judge.

  • Kemp & Wood [2016] FamCA 368

    13 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – undefended hearing – where the mother seeks an order that she be permitted to relocate to the United States of America – where consideration is given to the best interests of the child – where there is a risk of emotional and psychological harm for the child if her and the mother are prevented from relocating – where the father has not engaged in the proceedings nor spent time with the child for some time – where the mother is permitted to relocate – where orders are made for the child to live with the mother and for the mother to have sole parental responsibility.

  • Lennox & Lennox [2016] FamCA 367

    19 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best Interests – Where the children’s relationships with the mother are important and valuable to them – Where the nature of the eldest child’s relationship with the father means she derives little, if any, benefit from it and maintenance of that relationship is liable to cause her psychological harm – Where much the same may be said of the relationship between the youngest child and the father – Where the evidence proved the father was an oppressively violent domestic partner – Where the evidence of family violence stops around the time of the parties’ separation, well over three years ago, and accordingly there is no current need to protect the children from any psychological harm from exposure to family violence committed by the father – Where the father demonstrated no tangible change in his attitude or insight into his past actions – Children to live with the mother – Where orders requiring the children to spend more, unsupervised time with the father would certainly be detrimental to the mother’s emotional stability – Where the children should not be treated differentially and so the orders must be a compromise between the needs and desires of both children – Children to spend supervised time with the father on two occasions each year – Where occasional written communication between the father and the children is permitted – Where otherwise the father is restrained from approaching the mother’s residence or any school attended by either child

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental Responsibility – Where the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility does not apply because of the proven family violence between the parties – Where such an order would not be in the children’s best interests – Where the party with whom the children live should have exclusive parental responsibility – Mother to have sole parental responsibility

  • Hogan & Mallory [2016] FamCA 366

    19 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Procedural Fairness – Where the respondent wife disengaged from the proceedings and the trial proceeded on an undefended basis – Where the wife was afforded procedural fairness 

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Where it is just and equitable to adjust the parties’ existing property interests – Where the applicant husband’s overall contributions outweighed those of the wife – Where the parties will retain their own superannuation interests of relatively equivalent value and their property interests are divided by apportionment of 75 per cent to the husband and 25 per cent to the wife

  • Veitch & Dempsey [2016] FamCA 365

    06 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim orders – where the father seeks a variation of the orders made by consent – where there is a family report – where consideration is given to the best interests of the children – where an order is made for an autism assessment – where orders are made for one child to live with the father and spend time with the mother on a week about basis subject to his wishes – where orders are made for therapy.

  • Southwell & Sargent [2016] FamCA 364

    13 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim orders – where the mother seeks an order that she be permitted to travel with the child to Greece and that the father pay the costs of the child’s return airfare – where consideration is given to Greece being a Hague Convention country – where the mother is permitted to travel with the child – where the father is ordered to pay the mother a sum by way of partial property settlement.

  • Canvil & Merle and Ors [2016] FamCA 363

    29 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – JOINDER – where orders are sought against real property - where it is claimed that the property is held on trust – where the purported beneficial owners of the property are joined to proceedings.

  • Fleming & Fleming [2016] FamCA 362

    18 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Release and use of expert report – Where the father seeks the release of the single expert report for use in Apprehended Violence Order proceedings brought against him in the New South Wales Local Court – Where the Apprehended Violence Order sought by the police lists the children as protected persons – Whether the implied obligation applies to the single expert report – Consideration of Sahadi & Savva and Anor [2016] FamCAFC 65 – Where the Court finds the implied obligation does not apply to the single expert report – Whether in exercising the Court’s discretion the single expert report should be released – Where the Court finds it is not in the public interest for single expert reports to be released without redaction and without an undertaking being provided to seek a non- publication order.

  • Dickens & Dickens (No 2) [2016] FamCA 361

    04 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim – Where the father seeks a stay of the operation and enforcement of orders until the appeals are dealt with – Where the father seeks an order that a decision to refuse his request for a subpoena be set aside – Where the mother and the Independent Children’s Lawyer oppose the orders sought by the father – Where not granting the stay does not render nugatory the appeals against refusal to disqualify and refusal to remove the Independent Children's Lawyer – Where it is not in the best interests of the children to grant a stay of the order for the expert’s report– Where it is not appropriate for the father to cross-examine witnesses outside the process of the final hearing – Where the father’s two applications in a case are dismissed.

  • Sullivan & Cunez (No 2) [2016] FamCA 360

    13 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Small Asset Pool - Superannuation – Post separation liabilities not taken into account

  • Sullivan & Cunez [2016] FamCA 359

    13 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where the mother alleges that the paternal grandfather, the father and others had engaged in sexual misconduct against their daughter – Where the mother’s belief pertaining to the alleged abuse is driven by various statements made by the child – Where the child made inconsistent statements to police, family members and others - Where the mother is the primary carer of the children – Where the evidence is insufficient to establish the risk as unacceptable in terms of the father. Consideration of risks in terms of the paternal grandfather and risks in moving the primary residence of the daughter to the full time care of the father.

  • Canvil & Merle [2016] FamCA 358

    22 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – international travel – whether the mother ought to be permitted to travel overseas with the children.

  • Sandberg & Sandberg [2016] FamCA 357

    17 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Interim – Application by the wife pursuant to sections 72 and 74 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) that the husband pay her weekly spousal maintenance – Where there is one child who resides with the husband in the former matrimonial home – Where the wife works on a casual basis – Where the husband submitted that the wife has a much greater earning capacity than her current income – Where the Court is of the view that the wife does not have a greater earning capacity – Where the wife is unable to support herself adequately on her current income – Where the wife’s weekly expenses leave her with a shortfall – Where the husband’s weekly expenses leave him with a surplus – Orders made that the husband pay to the wife $204 per week by way of interim spousal maintenance until the wife receives proceeds of the sale of the former matrimonial home – Where such an amount will have the effect that both parties experience a similar weekly financial shortfall.

  • Southers & Southers (No 3) [2016] FamCA 356

    03 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim – Spouse maintenance – Application by the husband to vary spouse maintenance orders – Where urgent spouse maintenance orders had previously been made– Where the wife has made efforts to obtain paid employment – Where the wife has demonstrated a need for financial assistance – Where the Court finds that husband has the capacity to pay – Order made for interim spouse maintenance pending further order – Order made that the wife provide to the husband evidence of her efforts to obtain paid employment.

  • Sexton & Sexton [2016] FamCA 355

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Superannuation – Where the parties were in agreement that a splitting order should be made, whereby the wife would receive 100 per cent of the husband’s interest – Where the trustee of the superannuation fund was afforded procedural fairness – Where the Court finds that it is just and equitable for such an order to be made. 

    FAMILY LAW – ADULT CHILD MAINTENANCE – Where the wife sought adult child maintenance – Where the adult child is autistic and entirely dependent on the wife – Where the Court finds the husband has the capacity to pay maintenance – Orders made for the husband to pay adult child maintenance at the termination of the current child support assessment.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Where the wife sought spousal maintenance – Where the Court finds the wife is unable to support herself for the purposes of section 72 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where the Court finds the husband does not have the capacity to pay maintenance after meeting an order for adult child maintenance – Application dismissed.

  • Viola & Latham and Ors [2016] FamCA 354

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application for costs of proposed respondents arising out of the wife’s unsuccessful action for leave to bring proceedings on behalf of companies pursuant to s 237 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – whether the wife’s application was an application pursuant to the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) or the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – held that the wife’s application is not an application incidental to the property proceedings between she and the husband – where the proposed respondents are not parties to the property proceedings – finding that costs should follow the event – interim orders made for the wife to pay the costs of the proposed second and third respondents forthwith

  • Ramsey & Hays [2016] FamCA 353

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – With whom a child spends time – Parental responsibility – Best interests of the child – Child has lived with the father since 2011 – Significant issues of the mother’s mental health – Allegation of child abuse perpetrated by the paternal uncle – Concerns in relation to the mother’s husband – Child to live with the father and spend time with the mother – Father to hold parental responsibility.

  • Milovic & Banks [2016] FamCA 352

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – INTERIM ORDERS – Limited issue – June/July school holidays – where the father seeks equal time with both children – where the mother seeks that the father’s time with the child with special needs be limited – evidence of the family consultant considered – orders made for the children to spend equal time with the mother and father over the school holidays on a graduated basis

  • Greenhill & Carter [2016] FamCA 351

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim Parenting – With whom the children live with – Where the mother seeks to relocate the children within NSW – Where the children have well established relationships with both parents – Risk associated with the father’s history of drug use – The effect of the proposed change and relocation on the children – Significant practical difficulty due to the distance between the parents – Order for equal shared parental responsibility by consent – Father with drug testing orders and re-engage with his mental health practitioner.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appeal from Local Court – Hearing de novo.

  • Erington & Erington [2016] FamCA 350

    14 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM ORDERS – Application by the husband for sale the parties’ business – where the bank has issued a notice of default as a result of the business’ failure to meet its obligations to the bank – where the wife seeks that receivers be appointed – where an offer has been made by a party to purchase the business – orders made as sought by the husband pursuant to s 114

  • Akbar & Akbar (No 2) [2016] FamCA 349

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application by the wife that the husband pay her costs reserved in a fixed sum from a previous hearing date – where the husband has repeatedly failed to file material – where the husband has failed to comply with court orders – where the husband’s failure to file material by the previous hearing date likely meant that parts of the wife’s application which were not agreed could not proceed on that day – interim orders made for costs in a fixed sum

  • Sadko & Coleman [2016] FamCA 348

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Undefended hearing – where the applicant has failed to comply with court orders – where the applicant failed to appear at the hearing – consideration of the principles in Division 12A of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – leave granted to proceed on an undefended basis. 

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – FINAL ORDERS – Application for final parenting orders heard on an undefended basis – where the mother’s whereabouts are unknown – where the mother failed to appear at the hearing – where the mother has a history of mental illness and illicit drug use – where the father seeks to return to his country of employment with the child – where the child had previously been living primarily with the father – orders made that the father have sole parental responsibility, that the child live with the father and that the child have telephone and skype contact with the mother.

  • Selen & Selen and Anor [2016] FamCA 346

    07 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – BANKRUPTCY – Application to extend the life of a creditor’s petition pursuant to section 52(5) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) – Where bankruptcy proceedings were transferred from the Federal Circuit Court of Australia to the Family Court of Australia under section 35(2A) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) – Where the creditor is the wife in the family law proceedings – Where the debtor is the son of the wife and the deceased husband – Where the debtor is involved in the family law proceedings in his capacity as administrator of the deceased husband’s estate – Where the debt arises from outstanding costs ordered following unsuccessful appeals to the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia and the High Court of Australia – Whether it is just and equitable to extend the life of the creditor’s petition – Where the prejudice to the creditor is greater than the prejudice to the debtor in circumstances where the debtor had sought the transfer of the bankruptcy proceedings – Application granted.

  • Janssen & Janssen [2016] FamCA 345

    01 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – EVIDENCE – Admissibility – Admissibility of audio recordings made by the mother of exchanges between the parties in circumstances where the recordings were made without the consent of the father – Admissibility of transcripts of the audio recordings – Where the Court finds the audio recordings fall within the exception contained in sub-section 7(3)(b) of the Surveillance Devices Act 2007 (NSW) as the recordings were reasonably necessary to protect the lawful interests of the mother – Where the Court exercises its discretion to admit the audio recordings and transcripts into evidence – Certificate issued to the mother pursuant tosection 128 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth).

    FAMILY LAW – EVIDENCE – Application by the father under section 69ZT(3) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) for the provisions of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) to apply – Where there are serious allegations of family violence made against the father – Where the Court is satisfied ‘exceptional’ circumstances apply – Rules of evidence to apply to evidence given in respect of events on a specific date and alleged threats made by the father concerning the children.

  • Southers & Southers (No 2) [2016] FamCA 344

    15 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM SPOUSE MAINTENANCE – Application by the wife for urgent spouse maintenance – Where the wife has demonstrated an immediate need for financial assistance – Where the Court finds that the husband has a capacity to pay – Order for temporary spouse maintenance pending further order made pursuant to s 77 of the Family Law Act 1975(Cth).

  • Sampey & Sampey and Anor [2016] FamCA 343

    11 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – REVIEW OF REGISTRAR’S DECISION– OBJECTION TO SUBPOENA – Where certain objections made by the respondents to subpoenas issued by the wife were upheld by the Registrar – Where the wife seeks a review of the Registrar’s orders – Where the respondents dispute the relevance of the documents sought to the proceedings between the husband and the wife – Where the respondents assert that compliance with the subpoena would be oppressive and may reveal confidential information – Where the wife asserts the documents sought are necessary to ascertain the true financial position of the husband – Where the Court finds that the documents may be relevant to the proceedings

  • Duarte & Morse and Anor [2016] FamCA 342

    11 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PARENTING – Whether the mother should spend time with the children unsupervised – Where the children have been removed from the mother’s care by NSW State Courts – Where there has been supervised time previously – Where there are concerns as to risks posed in the mother’s household – Where there has been not opportunity to test the evidence in relation to the risks posed – Where the children have not spent time with the mother in a significant period of time – Where the final hearing is not to take place for some time

  • Fegley & Salway (No 2) [2016] FamCA 341

    15 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PARENTING – Whether the 13 year old child should spend more time with the mother – Where the child has not spent time with the mother for a considerable period – Where the child has made allegations about mother – Where the child has expressed views about spending time with the mother – Where two younger children spend time/live with the mother – Where there is a high conflict relationship between the parents.

  • Farnham & DeLuca [2016] FamCA 340

    11 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PARENTING – Whether the children should spend more time, including overnight time, with the father – Where the father spends limited time with one child – Where the father recently commenced spending supervised time with the younger child – Where there are allegations of Family Violence – Where there is a Family Report

  • Paggett & Cable [2016] FamCA 339

    15 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Who the child will live with – equal shared parenting – Allocation of time.

  • Merritt & Hill [2016] FamCA 338

    12 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Forum – Is Australia clearly inappropriate? – Both parties and their children live in Singapore – Consideration of advantages to wife – not clearly inappropriate – husband’s application for stay refused.

  • Folett & Langley (No 2) [2016] FamCA 337

    29 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – STAY – Application by father seeking a stay of final orders pending the hearing of an appeal – Application granted in part

  • Walton & Esposito [2016] FamCA 336

    29 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Nullity of Marriage – Whether consent obtained by fraud – Whether confined to fraud as to nature of the ceremony or identity of the other party - Where husband alleged “marriage of convenience” for immigration purposes – Neither the marriage nor the relationship was consummated – The wife did not appear at the hearing of the application nor did she file any affidavit material – Application dismissed as term fraud as it appears in s 23B(1)(d)(i) of the Marriage Act 1961 (Cth) has limited scope and is concerned with fraud as to identity of the other party or the nature of the ceremony, and not as to the motives of a party in entering into the marriage

  • Fallon & Bashandi [2016] FamCA 335

    20 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN –Parents their servants and/or agents be and are each hereby restrained from removing or attempting to remove child. Practice and Procedure – service of application

  • Re: Harley [2016] FamCA 334

    22 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – MEDICAL PROCEDURE – Gender dysphoria – declaration of Gillickcompetence and able to consent.

  • SCA & Vaberseck [2016] FamCA 333

    18 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Hague return application – procedure

  • Bailey & Huppatz [2016] FamCA 332

    03 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – where the father seeks unsupervised time with the child – where the Court does not consider it in the child’s best interests for supervision to be abandoned – where there is a risk of psychological harm – where orders are made for time with the father to continue on a supervised basis.

  • Watkins & Sutcliffe [2016] FamCA 331

    06 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – power to order the executor (as a party) is entitled to be indemnified for costs incurred from the deceased’s estate.

  • Reagan & Orton [2016] FamCA 330

    11 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Discrete issue as to child’s surname – Where mother seeks that the child be known by a hyphenated surname – Where father historically opposed the use of a hyphenated surname – Where father has failed to comply with directions for filing material and has failed to appear before the Court – Where appropriate that the matter proceed on an undefended basis – Where orders made previously for the child to live with the mother and the mother to have sole parental responsibility – Where the child is due to commence school in 2017 – Where the father’s surname is the child’s registered name but the mother and her extended family use the mother’s surname for the child and the child identifies with this name – Consideration of best interests principles – Order made that the mother be permitted to register the child’s surname as a hyphenated surname.

  • Rourke & Mercer [2016] FamCA 329

    06 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom the child lives – With whom the child spends time – Parental responsibility – Best interests of the child – Very young child – Father’s perpetration of family violence – Father’s mental health – Where father has disengaged from the proceedings – Benefit of a meaningful relationship – Need to protect the child from harm – Nature of the child’s relationship – Parental capacity – Attitude to the responsibilities of parenthood – Child live with the mother – Mother hold sole parental responsibility.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Non-appearance of a party – Considerations in respect of adjourning parenting proceedings – Proceed to final undefended hearing.

  • Hurford & Hurford [2016] FamCA 328

    02 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PROPERTY – Where the husband’s financial circumstances are complex and unclear – Where the wife seeks that the husband provide written details of any liability incurred since 8 December 2014 – Where the husband asserts that such an order is onerous – Where the wife seeks to change an existing order so that the husband is required to seek the wife’s permission to enter into a liability – Where the husband asserts that such an order would make his businesses impossible to run - Where the husband seeks to discharge orders requiring him to fund single expert reports - Where orders are made for the husband to provide written details of any liability in excess of $50,000 – Where an order is made that the husband is required to seek the wife’s permission in relation to transactions other than in the ordinary course of business – Where the matter is adjourned so that the husband can make inquiries as to obtaining assistance to fund single expert reports – Where a “dollar for dollar” order is made.

  • Bhatt & Sant [2016] FamCA 327

    11 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – INJUNCTIONS - Application by the mother that she be permitted to travel with the child to India and for the removal of the child’s name from the Airport Watch List – application opposed by the father and the Independent Children’s Lawyer – s 68B considered – where the mother recently abandoned an application to relocate to India – where the mother says she wishes to travel to India for the purpose of visiting her ill father and to take the child to a place of religious importance – where the child is of a young age – where the father’s relationship with the child is still developing – best interests of the child considered – mother’s application dismissed

  • Allan & Allan and Ors [2016] FamCA 326

    02 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS

  • Adair & Adair [2016] FamCA 325

    11 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom the children live – With whom the children spend time – Parental responsibility – Best interests of the children – Where the children have not spent time with the father since 2013– Family violence perpetrated by the father against the mother and children – Unacceptable risk of harm – No benefit to the children in this family having a relationship with their father – Need to protect the children from harm – Children to live with the mother and spend no time with the father – Restraints on the father – Mother hold sole parental responsibility.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Non-appearance of a party – No appearance by the father on the second day of hearing – Hearing proceeded on an undefended basis.

  • Arthur & Arthur [2016] FamCA 324

    10 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Settlement in relation to marriage – Where the parties cohabited for approximately 23 years – Where principal asset of the parties is the former matrimonial home –Where the parties agreed to equal division of total superannuation – Where the Court found that the husband was solely entitled to possession of the household goods in the former matrimonial home – Where the Court found s 75(2) factors in favour of the husband of 10 percent – Where the Court found that the husband was entitled to 80 percent and the wife entitled to 20 percent of the matrimonial property pool

  • Newton & Henzel [2016] FamCA 323

    06 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application to reopen – Rice & Asplund(1979) FLC 90-725 considered – where final orders have been made that the mother have sole parental responsibility, the children live with the mother and the children spend no time with the father – where the father seeks to reopen parenting proceedings in relation to parental responsibility and his time with the children – no significant change of circumstance shown to justify reopening – application to reopen dismissed

  • Brook & Brook and Anor [2016] FamCA 322

    06 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where a subpoenaed party seeks costs of compliance – consideration of rule 15.23 of the Family Law Rules 2004 – where subpoenaed party asserts it incurred substantial loss or expense in complying – where costs incurred by subpoenaed party exceeded conduct money – where costs of compliance were not found to be reasonable – failure to establish substantial loss or expense as a result of compliance – interim orders made that the application for costs be dismissed.

  • Brook & Brook [2016] FamCA 321

    06 May 2016

    FAMILY – CHILDREN – FINAL ORDERS – what time the child spends with the father – where the mother the child at risk of abuse– where the mother makes allegations of physical and emotional abuse perpetrated against her by the father – whether the father poses an unacceptable risk to the child – where the mother seeks the father’s time with the child be limited to after school two nights each week, no overnight time and otherwise by agreement – where the mother makes no formal proposal for school holidays or on special occasions – finding that the father is not an unacceptable risk to the child – best interests consideration – finding that the child should spend significant and substantial time with the father – orders made for the child to spend increasing time with the father including overnight, weekend and holiday time

    FAMILY – CHILDREN – FINAL ORDERS – CHILDREN – FINAL ORDERS – Parental responsibility – best interests – where the mother seeks sole parental responsibility – where an order for sole parental responsibility may enable the mother to exclude the father from the child’s life – where the parties have recently engaged in family therapy – where there is recent evidence of the parties agreeing on issues regarding the child – orders for equal shared parental responsibility 

    FAMILY – CHILDREN – FINAL ORDERS – PROPERTY – FINAL ORDERS – where parties were married for 12 years – where there is one young child of the relationship – where the child lives with the mother and spends significant and substantial time with the father – where it is just and equitable to make orders altering the parties interests in property – where the mother has a greater earning capacity than the father – where contributions by and on behalf of the mother during the marriage and post separation including financial support of the child are greater than those of the father– where the mother opposes a superannuation splitting order – orders made for an overall division of the asset pool including superannuation entitlements of 60 per cent: 40 per cent in favour of the mother

  • Allen & Cortez [2016] FamCA 320

    06 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Stay of proceedings – where the husband is an Australian citizen living in the United States – where the wife is a dual citizen of Country C and Australia living in the United States – where the husband initiated property proceedings in Australia in August 2014 – where the wife subsequently issued proceedings in the United States in October 2015 – where the wife issued an Application in a Case for the Australian proceedings to be stayed pending determination of the proceedings in the United States – where the husband filed a response opposing the wife’s application and seeking an anti-suit injunction against the wife – “clearly inappropriate forum” test applied – orders made that the wife’s application for a stay of the Australian proceedings be dismissed and she be restrained from continuing any proceedings in any other jurisdiction including the United States.

  • Ilhan & Sett [2016] FamCA 319

    06 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best Interests – Where the child has a meaningful relationship with both his parents – Where there is no evidence to support the mother’s belief that the child has been sexually abused in the father’s household – Where it has to be said that the child’s interview with JIRT was so flawed as to be unreliable – Where the father’s two friends who live with him do not represent an unacceptable risk of sexual harm to the child – Where there is some risk of psychological harm to the child in the mother’s household – Where the mother’s strongly entrenched views about the possibility of sexual abuse of the child in the father’s household create the risk of further allegations being made and the child being continually questioned to satisfy the mother’s need to have her fears allayed – Where the mother is the child’s primary attachment figure – Where the damage to the child of being moved into the father’s household and the distress that the mother would experience would likely be very much adverse to the child’s healthy development – Where the mother submits that will make an effort to support the child in his relationship with the father, particularly if she obtains professional assistance to do so – Child to live with the mother – Child to spend regular time with the father, after a short transition period 

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental Responsibility – Where it is in the best interests of the child for the parties to have equal shared parental responsibility

  • Thurston & Loomis and Ors [2016] FamCA 318

    09 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Asset pool - Superannuation – Interim - Where there has been substantial non-compliance with relevant legislation and regulations – Where the parties have improperly withdrawn funds from the superannuation account – Where withdrawals treated as loans – Where there is expert evidence the loans should be repaid with interest calculated at the appropriate rate.

  • Doyle & Rusedski [2016] FamCA 317

    06 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – where consent orders were made in 2013 – review as a result of incidents including an assault – how to deal with conviction even though the facts were disputed – impact of conviction for assault on family violence finding.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – question of whether previously agreed time should be reduced.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – international travel – dealing with the question of unacceptable risk of flight.

  • Whitecross & Reilly (No 3) [2016] FamCA 316

    30 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Evidence objection - Ruling

  • Kouvades & Kouvades and Anor (No 2) [2016] FamCA 315

    05 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS.

  • Grant & Aiden (No 6) [2016] FamCA 314

    29 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Adjournment of the concluding part of a contravention application where mother found to have breached.

    FAMILY LAW – Submissions had already been heard – no utility – application refused.

  • Grant & Aiden (No 5) [2016] FamCA 313

    29 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Contravention – compensatory time.

  • Greville & Greville and Anor [2016] FamCA 312

    20 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Proceedings issued inappropriately by a wife (through solicitors) where she was the subject of a VCAT Administration order – proceedings struck out.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS.

  • Gallato & Cellini and Anor (No 2) [2016] FamCA 311

    06 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Injunctions and variations of extant orders to enable father to get his property.

  • Bendon & Bendon [2016] FamCA 310

    05 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Contempt – application flawed – summarily dismissed.

  • Akbar & Akbar [2016] FamCA 309

    06 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Adjournment refused.

  • Whitecross & Reilly (No 2) [2016] FamCA 308

    21 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS

  • Vale & Vale [2016] FamCA 307

    06 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – LEGAL PRACTITIONERS – Discharge – Where the mother seeks an order that the ICL be discharged – Whether the ICL has shown bias towards the mother and acted unprofessionally – Application dismissed.

  • Liang & Meng [2016] FamCA 306

    06 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – Where the husband seeks the sale of four properties owned by the parties – Where the wife proposes that the husband utilise income generated from the parties’ business to service the mortgages on the four properties – Where there are currently significant arrears owed in respect of the mortgages – Where the Court finds merit in the husband’s proposal to sell two of the properties, which are presently tenanted – Orders made for the sale of the two tenanted properties – Orders made for the parties to share equally the mortgage repayments of the two remaining properties.

  • Thurston & Loomis and Anor [2016] FamCA 305

    05 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTION – Whether the husband should be restrained from refinancing a debt owed by the Second Respondent company – Where the debt is secured by mortgage over real property owned by the company – Where there are extant orders allowing the refinancing of the debt – Where the extant orders prohibit increasing the company’s capital debt – Where the husband has previously refinanced the debt owed by the company allowing the company to access additional funds in the amount of GBP35,590.

  • Choudhary & McDonald [2016] FamCA 304

    05 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – EVIDENCE – Question as to whether s 69ZT(3) should be invoked and the provisions of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) applied – allegations of sexual and physical abuse against the father – allegations of emotional abuse against the mother – whether ‘exceptional circumstances’ – order that the rules of evidence apply 

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Whether the respondent mother should be treated as the applicant for the purposes of the final hearing – where the mother has made serious allegations against the father – order that the mother be treated as the applicant for the purposes of the final hearing

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Family consultants – application by the mother for a replacement of the family consultant – where the family consultant proposed has previously prepared a s 11F report and a family report – where the mother alleges that the family consultant is biased – where the mother is also critical of other professionals involved in the matter – principles in s 69ZN of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) considered – impact upon the children of a new family consultant considered – order that the family consultant proposed prepare an undated family report

  • Bolton & Creasey [2016] FamCA 303

    03 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – whether proceedings transferred from the Federal Circuit Court should be transferred back to the Federal Circuit Court – considerations bearing on transfer between Courts – whether the matter was commenced in accordance with relevant protocol – protocol for division of work between the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court – where court considers transfer on its own motion, not though application of party – where there is a failure to give reasons for judicial decision.

  • SCVG & Child Support Registrar (No 2) [2016] FamCA 302

    19 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – STAY APPLICATION – Where there has been a previous stay order – Where an extension is requested – Where the Full Court is due to hear the matter within a short space of time – Where the stay is granted with conditions

  • Tothill & Crowther (No 2) [2016] FamCA 301

    29 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – affidavits – where the father seeks to rely upon an affidavit that was filed out of time – where consideration is given to prejudice – where the Court is prepared to rely upon the affidavit for the purposes of the contravention application.

    FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – where the father alleges that the mother did not facilitate handover of the child – where the father seeks an order which would include a term of imprisonment – where various counts are dismissed.

  • Grant & Aiden (No 4) [2016] FamCA 300

    15 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Recovery order issued in the absence of mother so that assessment can be made as to what is in a child’s best interests.

  • Grant & Aiden (No 3) [2016] FamCA 299

    22 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Parenting – where contravention found proved but mother not co-operating about having child assessed as to whether enforcement by compensatory time is appropriate – s 11F order made – mother’s applications not prosecuted because of her absence – struck out.

  • Shields and Anor & Putney [2016] FamCA 298

    13 Apr 2016

    .FAMILY LAW CHILDREN – Best interests – Interim – With whom a child spends time – Where there are three children aged three, five and eight – Where the applicant mother seeks orders allowing her to spend regular time with the children supervised by the applicant father or the paternal grandparents – Where the applicant father supports the applicant mother’s application – Where the respondent maternal grandmother opposes the application – Where the biological father of the eldest child is not a party to the proceedings but has been given notice – Where the mother attempted to commit suicide approximately five months ago – Where previous orders had been made providing for the children to live with the respondent maternal grandmother – Where a final Apprehended Violence Order is in place against the mother preventing her from having contact with the children for 12 months – Consideration of s 68P of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Orders made for the applicant mother to spend time with the children supervised by the paternal grandmother or grandfather – Where the paternal grandparents are required to enter into an undertaking with respect to their supervision obligations – Where the Court noted that certain Orders made by this Court are inconsistent with certain Apprehended Violence Orders and that to the extent of that inconsistency, those Apprehended Violence Orders are invalid.

  • Harris & Harris (No 2) [2016] FamCA 297

    15 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – where the mother alleges the father contravened orders of the Court by encouraging the children to abuse, criticise or denigrate the mother – where the father denies the allegation – where the contravention is not established.

  • Andrews & Lewis [2016] FamCA 296

    03 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – where the children are 15 and 12 years old – parental responsibility with respect to education and healthcare issues – how often the youngest child spends time with the father.

  • Kyte & Yorke [2016] FamCA 295

    03 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Stay of proceedings – Where the Court ordered a partial stay of proceedings pending determination of the husband’s appeal

  • Tolbert & Tolbert [2016] FamCA 294

    26 Apr 2016

    .FAMILY LAW - INTERIM - CHILDREN

  • Raines & Grant [2016] FamCA 293

    09 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom the child spends time – Where the mother has not permitted the child to have any further contact with the father since July 2014 – Where the child has previously been diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder – Where the mother contends that the child would have difficulty “managing” a rei-introduction to the father – The father’s time with the child to be supported by therapeutic counselling and supervision.

  • Macey & Hamilton [2016] FamCA 292

    02 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best Interests – Where both parents acknowledge that the children have meaningful relationships with both of them and that there is no need to protect the children from physical or psychological harm – Where the parties agree the children should remain living with the mother – Discrete Issue – Where the mother wishes to relocate the children’s residence from D Town in the state of Victoria to J Town on the north coast of New South Wales, a distance of about 1,600 kilometres – Where the father opposes that relocation – Where the mother’s proposal makes weekend time between the children and the father impracticable and expensive – Where the mother did not appreciate the impact on the children of such relocation – Where the relationship between the children and the father would be diminished by a change of residence – Where the children would also lose contact with their paternal family – Children to remain living with the mother – Mother restrained from moving the residence of the children away from D Town – Children to spend substantial and significant time with the father

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental Responsibility – Where the parties agree they should share parental responsibility – Parties to have equal shared responsibility for the children

  • Nashi & Shona [2016] FamCA 291

    28 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom the child lives – With whom the child spends time – Parental responsibility – Best interests of the child – No participation by the father – Issues of family violence – Issues of the father’s mental health – Unacceptable risk of harm – Need to protect the child from harm – Nature of the child’s relationship with each parent – Capacity of each parent to provide for the child’s needs – Attitude to the child and responsibilities of parenthood – Travel

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Non-appearance of a party – Undefended final hearing.

  • Nikolakis & Nikolakis [2016] FamCA 290

    29 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – international travel – where mother has had no contact with subject children for some years – where children chosen to be representatives at overseas ceremony and battlefield tours - where mother has not responded to request for consent to issue Australian travel documents for children and remove children from airport watch list – where some urgency in application – where mother notified of application – where appropriate to hear application ex parte – where orders made as asked.

  • Stopford Molloy & Molloy [2016] FamCA 289

    22 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – where the husband seeks that the amount be reduced – where the Court is satisfied that the wife has established a need for payment – where consideration is given to the husband’s capacity to pay and the parties change in circumstances – where the spousal maintenance provisions previously ordered are continued.

  • Jsing & Kong [2016] FamCA 288

    26 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – NULLITY – Applicant for declaration – where respondent still married at time of subject marriage – declaration made.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Whether the respondent husband should be referred to the Commonwealth Attorney-General following a declaration of nullity on the grounds of bigamy – where referral appropriate.

  • Jasentu & Suwandaratne [2016] FamCA 287

    21 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Transfer of proceedings

  • Harris & Harris [2016] FamCA 286

    15 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – where on the balance of probabilities the alleged contravention has not been established – where the four counts are dismissed.

  • Hall & Hall (No 3) [2016] FamCA 285

    22 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – stay of proceedings – where the husband seeks a stay until determination of the application for leave to appeal is determined – where the Court is not satisfied that there is significant prospect of there being an arguable case – where the basis for a stay is not established – where the application is dismissed.

  • Cotter & Mehri [2016] FamCA 284

    29 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim proceedings – where allegations as to the mother’s mental health – where the mother has had two recent admissions to mental health facilities – where appropriate to frame orders protectively pending appropriate enquiry as to the mothers mental health – where factual disputes unable to be determined - discussion of general principles as to interim proceedings.

  • Atuk & Atuk [2016] FamCA 283

    29 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim parenting – With whom the children live – With whom the children spend time – Best interests of the children – Principles for interim parenting applications – Meaningful relationships – Change in circumstances – Concerns in relation to the father’s parenting capacity – Children’s schooling

  • Harvey & Adams [2016] FamCA 282

    29 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – where the mother seeks sole parental responsibility for the children, that the children live with her and spend no time with the father – where the father seeks orders for gradually increasing time with the children – where there is a history of domestic violence and aggressive behaviour perpetrated by the father –where consideration is given to the detrimental effect time with the father would have on the mother’s emotional and psychological health – where the risk of psychological harm to the children outweighs the benefit of a meaningful relationship with the father with the father.

  • Graham & Kovacs [2016] FamCA 281

    29 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Abuse of process - vexatious proceeding orders pursuant to s102Q restraining father from instituting further proceedings without leave. 

    FAMILY LAW - PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Adjournments – Contravention proceedings and applications – Application by father to give evidence by telephone – Where Court not persuaded that the father’s assertions are sufficient to justify him being permitted to appear by telephone.

  • Grella & Jamieson [2016] FamCA 280

    22 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – INTERNATIONAL RELOCATION – where the mother seeks to relocate with the four year old child to Europe – where the father opposes the relocation – where, in the alternative, the mother seeks to relocate to Melbourne –where the child’s time with her father has been somewhat sporadic –whether there is a benefit to the child of a meaningful relationship with her father – whether the child’s relationship with her father can be maintained and developed if the child relocates to Europe – where the mother’s application to relocate the child internationally is refused – where there is no substantive evidence to support a relocation to Melbourne – where the mother’s application to relocate the child to live in Melbourne is refused –the child’s time with her father.

  • Maddigan & Geary [2016] FamCA 279

    28 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best Interests – Where two prior sets of final parenting orders were made between the parties with their consent – Where the children have meaningful relationships with both parents – Where the children do not require protection against any risk of harm through their exposure or subjection to family violence, sexual abuse or physical abuse – Where the only risk of harm confronting the children is the threat to their emotional security posed by their exposure to incessant parental conflict – Where the mother has little insight into how her anxiety adversely affects the children and compromises their relationships with the father – Where the mother failed to comply with court orders by withholding the children from the father on numerous occasions – Where if the children remain living with the mother they are in grave danger of losing their valuable relationships with the father – Where orders for the children to live with the mother and spend substantial and significant time with the father would probably fail, given that regime has failed twice already – Children to live with the father – Where, after an initial short embargo period, the children are to spend substantial and significant time with the mother 

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental Responsibility – Where the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility does not apply because the evidence proved both parties engaged in family violence at times in the past – Where neither the children nor the parties would be well served by such an order – Where the only feasible option is to allocate parental responsibility exclusively to the party with whom the children shall primarily live – Father to have sole parental responsibility

  • Dillon & Betts [2016] FamCA 278

    12 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Adjournment during trial refused

  • Cutler & Warwick and Anor [2016] FamCA 277

    07 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – Application for a stay of the collection of arrears arising from a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to increase the father’s annual rate of child support – Application for a stay of the collection of any additional child support as a consequence of that decision – Where the father has not filed an appeal against the Tribunal’s decision – Where the parties have competing child support departure applications which are yet to be determined in these proceedings – Consideration ofsection 111C of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth) – Where the Court finds it appropriate to only stay the collection of arrears.

  • Vontek & Vontek [2016] FamCA 276

    14 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Orders by Consent - that the parents have equal shared parental responsibility for the children 

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Orders by determination – that the children live with the wife and spend time with the husband as agreed or failing agreement as set out in the orders

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Superannuation – evaluation of contributions and future needs - just and equitable division of matrimonial property whereas the husband receives 33 per cent and the wife receives 67 per cent

  • Smoothe & Enmore [2016] FamCA 275

    28 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – CHILD ABUSE – Whether the father has sexually abused the child – Where the mother’s allegations are unsubstantiated – Where there are issues as to the mother’s credit – Whether the child should live with the father – Where the mother subjected the child to numerous photographs, videos and medical examinations.

  • Majid & Sunil [2016] FamCA 274

    27 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim orders made pursuant to s 69ZR - Where the father seeks final parenting orders for gradually increasing periods of time with the children – Where the mother seeks sole parental responsibility and for the children to spend no time with the father – Where the mother seeks final parenting orders permitting her to relocate with the children to East Asia – Where the father has had no contact with the second child who was born after the parties separated – Where the mother makes allegations of family violence against the father – Where the mother alleges the father is involved in extremist activities, and has been involved in serious criminal activities – Where it is agreed that a determination is to be made in relation to the mother’s allegations to assist in making interim orders and making directions in relation to further evidence prior to determining the matter on a final basis –Where no findings can be made that the father has threatened or committed family violence or that the father has been involved in extremist activities – Where there is no unacceptable risk to the children seeing their father – Where orders are made for the father to have supervised time with the children at a Contact Centre – Where orders are made for the mother to file evidence in relation to her immigration status – Where the children’s names are placed on the Family Law Watchlist – Where orders are made preventing the removal of the children from Australia for a period of two years – Where orders are made for the appointment of a single expert and the preparation of a report.

  • Krane-Taylor & Krane-Taylor [2016] FamCA 273

    11 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim applications – issue as to which schools the children should sit entrance and scholarship examinations for– high level of conflict between the parties – orders made for each party to file an application in relation to the selection of schools for the children 

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTIONS – application made by the husband to restrain the wife from disseminating medical, allied health, intellectual and cognitive information in relation to the children to third parties – where the wife has provided excerpts of the family report to third parties – interim orders made for a mutual restraint in the terms sought by the husband

  • Betts & Dillon [2016] FamCA 272

    28 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – sexual abuse allegations – where child makes a statement to mother but the allegation is otherwise not corroborated by any objective facts – where mother’s affidavit material prepared by her solicitor is vague and an incomplete picture – examination of surrounding material obtained by Independent Children’s Lawyer establishes no unacceptable risk.

    FAMILY LAW – Where second child makes an allegation but later vacillates as to whether or not it was a dream – no unacceptable risk.

    FAMILY LAW – Where mother relies upon psychologist who is counselling child but without proper factual foundation, that reinforces in the mind of the child that something happened.

    FAMILY LAW – Where family consultant expresses concern about mother’s psychological abuse of the children.

    FAMILY LAW – Contact regime ordered.

  • Milano & Milano [2016] FamCA 271

    27 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – relocation to United States – Significant difference in lifestyles, including aspiration – child better off with wife – wife better off in USA – discussion about marijuana use and its impact on parenting – query relevance of removing overnight time if drug screen show marijuana presence.

  • Demarco & Demarco [2016] FamCA 270

    27 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where final parenting orders were made by consent – Where the mother makes an application for costs against the father – Where the father seeks that the application be dismissed – Consideration of section 117(2A) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where the Court finds the circumstances do not justify a costs order being made in favour of the mother – Application dismissed.

  • Loomis & Thurston and Anor [2016] FamCA 269

    27 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – EVIDENCE – Subpoena – Whether the husband should be granted leave to use subpoenaed material – Where the documents intended to be used to support appeals to the Full Court and applications to Legal Services Commission, Government and Police authorities – Where the subpoenaed documents not in evidence before the Court at first instance – Where husband would have to seek leave from the Full Court to adduce fresh evidence – Where the husband alleges the wife’s former solicitor has committed perjury, “disentitling conduct” and “professional misconduct” – Where the husband’s application designed to “harass, annoy and/or cause detriment” to the wife’s former solicitor – Application dismissed.

  • Bunson & Abbey [2016] FamCA 268

    12 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Discrete issue – Where whether there has been sufficient change of circumstances since final parenting orders were made in November 2015 to justify reconsidering parenting orders – Where none of the matters raised by the mother represent a change of circumstance – Mother’s application dismissed

  • Re: Lincoln [2016] FamCA 267

    22 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – MEDICAL PROCEDURES – Where the applicants are parents of a child with gender dysphoria – Where the applicants seek a finding that the child is competent to authorise Stage 2 treatment – Where the child’s treating medical experts support the child commencing Stage 2 treatment and agree that the child is competent to make such a decision – Whether the child is Gillick competent – Where the Court finds the child is competent at law to make his own decision as to Stage 2 treatment.

  • Winton & Winton (No 2) [2016] FamCA 266

    13 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – between parties – where the wife seeks an order for costs – where there is no appearance by the husband – where the husband has been wholly unsuccessful – where there was an offer of settlement – where the husband is ordered to pay the wife’s legal costs from a date considered just and equitable by the Court.

  • Miller and Anor & Harvey and Anor [2016] FamCA 265

    22 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – STAY APPLICATION – where the applicant former solicitor for the wife seeks to stay the parties’ final property orders made by consent pending an appeal by the applicant – Discretionary exercise – stay application dismissed.

  • Daniels & Green [2016] FamCA 264

    14 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – interim orders – where the wife seeks an order that the husband discharge the mortgage and remove the caveat over the property and execute a loan application – where the order is opposed by the husband – where there are ongoing proceedings in the District Court in relation to the caveat – where the Court considers that on an interim basis it is not appropriate to make an order that would increase the debt of the parties – where the wife has provided limited detail in her affidavit about the purpose and use of the loan – where the application is dismissed. 

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – where the husband seeks an order for costs – where the wife has been wholly unsuccessful – where consideration is given to the financial circumstances of the parties – where the application for costs is dismissed.

  • Cullin & Tarankiev [2016] FamCA 263

    22 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – INTERNATIONAL RELOCATION – where the mother seeks to relocate with the child to Sweden – where the child is now four years old – relocation permitted after July 2017

  • Watts & Mantello [2016] FamCA 262

    15 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INJUNCTION – where orders were made ex parte restraining the use of certain funds – whether such injunction ought to be continued – where injunction discharged.

  • Paretino & Paretino [2016] FamCA 261

    19 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Short term interim parenting – Allegations of family violence, mental health concerns, substance misuse – Issue of how long the father’s time with the children should be supervised – Need to protect the children from harm – Orders made as sought by the mother.

  • Peters & Giannopoulos [2016] FamCA 260

    22 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – interim – litigation funding – where the wife seeks a lump sum payment for the purpose of litigation funding and disbursement costs – where the wife suggests the husband has a significant entitlement to the accumulated wealth of a number of entities controlled by his parents – where the husband denies he has access to the financial resources alleged by the wife – where the husband is ordered to pay the wife a lump sum in direct deduction of the wife’s legal fees – where a “dollar for dollar” order is made in favour of the wife.

    FAMILY LAW – DISCOVERY – where the wife seeks that the husband produce a vast range of documents relating to the company and trust entities – where the husband opposes the order on the basis that he has already provided all of the documents in his possession, power and control – where consideration is given as to whether the husband has a right to have regard to the due administration of any trust in which he is a beneficiary and on that basis is entitled to call for documents – where the Court declines to make the order – where it is ordered that the husband provide discovery of bank statements.

  • Peng & Cao [2016] FamCA 259

    22 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – undefended proceedings – husband makes no contribution to the proceeding – children have long been in the mother’s care without physical assistance from the husband – no basis to make an order for equal shared parental responsibility as the husband has not exercised it and has indicated no desire to do so – order made for the children to live with the wife.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – wife seeks transfer of husband’s interest in home to her – modest interest of equal contribution to property to separation but no financial details provided by the husband – subsequent to separation, wife has had a major role.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – husband’s parents make joint payment used by the parties to acquire matrimonial home – evidence indicates intention to make joint gift – no adjustment in favour of the husband for contribution.

  • E Pty Ltd and Ors & Klearchos [2016] FamCA 258

    22 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTIONS – Where the applicant companies are seeking orders to discharge various injunctions restraining them from dealing with property – Where the companies assert that their ability to trade is hampered by the restraints – Where the injunctions were made ex parte – Where the wife contends that the assets of a family trust are “property of the parties to the marriage” within the meaning of s 79 – Where the wife contends that the husband effectively controls a family trust – Where the wife asserts, in effect, the companies are asking the Court to summarily dismiss an argument that the wife would put at final hearing – Where the husband asserts he is a mere beneficiary of the family trust – Where in order to maintain the injunctions, the wife must show that she has a “good arguable case” or that there is a serious question to be tried – Where the wife has established such – Where the balance of convenience is in favour of the wife – Where it is appropriate to order that the injunctions continue – Application dismissed.

  • Cooper & Miller [2016] FamCA 257

    22 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – where the mother seeks orders for equal shared parental responsibility for the child but for the child’s time with the father to be supervised until 2019 and conditional upon the father completing a number of courses and assessments – where the father seeks orders for sole parental responsibility and for the child’s time with the mother to be liberal – where there are allegations of sexual and physical abuse perpetrated by the father – where there are allegations of psychological abuse perpetrated by the mother – where both parties seek a finding of unacceptable risk – where consideration is given to the weight attributed to the evidence of the family consultant – where the Court finds that the mother’s allegations are without foundation and the father does not present any risk to the child – where the Court finds that the mother poses a risk of psychological and emotional harm to the child by her ongoing hostility towards the father – where orders are made in relation to parental responsibility and for the child to live with the father but spend substantial and significant time with the mother.

  • Acres & Cannon (No 2) [2016] FamCA 256

    02 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application seeking leave to commence parenting proceedings under s 102QG of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Application adjourned to a fixed date

    FAMILY LAW – DISQUALIFICATION – Where applicant made an oral application that presiding judge recuse himself from hearing the application to reopen parenting proceedings - Where applicant alleges apprehended bias because judge had made adverse findings of credit in previous substantive proceedings – Application granted

  • Leroux & Leroux [2016] FamCA 255

    02 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – OBJECTION TO SUBPOENA – Where father has issued subpoena to children’s treating therapist and Child Protection Authorities – Where the children’s treating therapist and Independent Children’s Lawyer object – Where parts of subpoena are struck out

  • Whitecross & Reilly [2016] FamCA 254

    21 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – question of the unacceptable risk to a child living with the mother where allegations made 20 years ago were then accepted by a trial judge – subsequent findings of unacceptable risk taken into account – no unacceptable risk found and no basis to change residence.

  • Needham & Trustees of the Bankrupt Estate of Needham [2016] FamCA 253

    20 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Where the husband has been declared bankrupt – Where the proceedings are between the wife and Trustees of the Bankrupt Estate of the husband – Where the only significant asset is the former matrimonial home and it is agreed between the parties that the asset is to be sold – Where the Court finds it is just and equitable to alter the interests of the parties pursuant to section 79(2) – Where the Court finds the contributions of the wife and husband were equal until separation – Where the Court finds the contributions of the wife in the period post separation were greater than the husband – Whether an adjustment should be made in favour of the wife due to alleged non-disclosure on behalf of the Trustees – Whether an adjustment should be made in favour of the wife as a result of the husband’s conduct that led to his bankruptcy – Where the Court finds section 75(2) considerations favour an adjustment of 5 per cent in favour of the wife – Orders made for the wife to receive 68 per cent of the proceeds of sale of the former matrimonial home and 68 per cent of the value of her other property – Orders made for the Trustees to receive 32 per cent of the proceeds of sale of the former matrimonial home and 32 per cent of the value of the wife’s other property.

  • Chandler & Wurt [2016] FamCA 252

    21 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Principal Registrar - Review of decision – Whether the mother should have time with the children – Where the father lives in Sydney – Where the mother lives in Queensland – Where the mother has a newborn baby to her incarcerated former partner – Where the father agrees to pay for airfares and contribute $100 to costs and expenses of the weekend per visit – Where the father previously tested positive for methyl amphetamines from a hair follicle test.

  • Yang & Lin [2016] FamCA 251

    20 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Forum – husband seeks permanent stay – application refused.

  • Rankin & Rankin [2016] FamCA 250

    29 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Just and equitable – equal contributions – consideration of s 75(2) factors – where the husband has failed to meet his child support obligations – where the husband has a greater income earning capacity – where the wife has the primary care of the children of the marriage – where the parties non-superannuation interests have modest value – adjustment of 20 per cent made in favour of the wife 

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Legal fees – where the husband has paid his legal fees from income post-separation – where the wife seeks that her solicitors be paid an amount equal to that paid by the husband to his solicitors – where the wife made contributions to the development of the husband’s career – where the husband failed to service the mortgage liabilities on the parties’ properties pursuant to court orders at the time he made payments of his legal fees –orders made that an amount be paid to the wife’s solicitors

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – where the wife seeks a lump sum payment of spousal maintenance – where the husband has previously failed to meet his obligations pursuant to court order to meet the mortgage liabilities – where the husband has a substantially greater income than the wife – where the husband has failed to meet his obligations to make full and frank disclosure in relation to his income – final orders made for lump sum spousal maintenance

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – Application by the wife for a departure order, arrears of child support based upon such departure order and non-periodic child support – where the husband concedes the wife’s application for non-periodic child support and disputes a departure order – where the husband has lodged an estimate of his annual income that grossly understates his actual income – just and equitable to make a departure order – final orders made varying the husband’s child support income and providing for non-periodic child support for the children

  • Botsis & Botsis [2016] FamCA 249

    11 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Sale of property – interim application by the wife for the sale of property – where the husband has previously failed to service the mortgage on the property in accordance with court orders – where the wife alleges that the husband has drawn down on his superannuation to service the mortgage and seeks to preserve the asset pool – where the husband currently resides in the property – where the husband seeks to retain the property – where the husband deposes that his income will increase in the next year – where the mortgage is currently not in arrears – where the wife has not particularised the final property orders sought by her – interim orders made dismissing the wife’s application for sale of property

  • Timmins & Mitropoulos and Ors [2016] FamCA 248

    20 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Joinder – consideration of r 6.03 of theFamily Law Rules 2004 (Cth) – where the joinder is opposed by two of the proposed respondents but no submissions or material is filed by them in support of their position – where the proposed respondents have lodged caveats over the former matrimonial home and claim debts owed by the deceased husband – interim orders made for the joinder of the respondents

  • Palma & Murphey and Anor [2016] FamCA 247

    18 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom the child spends time – Parental responsibility – Best interest of the child – Where the mother has disengaged from the proceedings and heard on an undefended basis – No finding of unacceptable risk of harm in the father’s care – Finding of unacceptable risk of harm in the mother’s care– Where the mother has not spent time with child since mid-2013 and here whereabouts are unknown – Benefit of a meaningful relationship mother – Need to protect the child from risk of harm – Nature of the child’s relationships – Parental capacity – Attitude to the child and responsibilities of parenthood.

  • Forbes & Ballimore [2016] FamCA 246

    15 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Proposed interim consent orders – Issues of concern – Orders made on an interim basis pending a more complete consideration after the Child Responsive Program Memorandum.

  • Hilliard & Hilliard and Anor [2016] FamCA 245

    18 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – URGENT SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – wife’s application for urgent spousal maintenance pending contested interim spousal maintenance hearing – where wife has established an immediate need for financial assistance pursuant to s 77 – where the husband has capacity to pay – order for husband to pay urgent spousal maintenance and continue to pay rent for the benefit of the wife pending contested hearing – wife’s application for urgent spousal maintenance granted.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JOINDER – wife’s application to join the husband’s family company to the matrimonial property proceedings between the husband and the wife – where the company is the trustee of a Unit Trust – where the husband is a director of the company and has a one third interest in the Unit Trust – where husband alleges the Unit Trust is the registered proprietor of the property that the parties resided in during the marriage and where the wife and child continue to reside – no evidence at this stage of proceedings that the company (as distinct from the Unit Trust) may be directly affected by an issue in the case such as to require the company to be joined under Rule 6.02(1) – insufficient evidence to warrant joinder – wife’s application for joinder refused.

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTION – wife’s application to restrain the husband’s family company from selling or otherwise disposing of property – where the company is the trustee of a Unit Trust – where the husband is a director of the company and has a one third interest in the Unit Trust – where husband alleges the Unit Trust is the registered proprietor of the property – where there is no evidence that the company owns the property – where the nature of the husband’s interest in the property is inevitably linked with the interests of other unit holders in the Unit Trust – where there is no evidence of the identity of or notice to other unit holders in the Unit Trust – injunction on company not justified in the circumstances – wife’s application for injunction refused.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – wife’s application to retain possession of motor vehicle driven by her but registered in the husband’s name – application granted.

  • Lake & Grey [2016] FamCA 244

    18 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Spend time – where the parties have agreed that the child spend each alternate weekend with the father – where the father seeks additional time with the child for one evening in the intervening week which is not agreed to by the mother – where the child is 12 years of age and has indicated to the family consultant a desire to spend further time with the father – final orders made for the father to spend time with the child each alternate weekend and for one evening in the intervening week

  • State Central Authority & Tercel [2016] FamCA 243

    18 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – HAGUE CONVENTION – Habitual residence – question of whether the child had acquired habitual residence in Poland over a four month period prior to her being retained by the father in Australia – where the child’s place of habitual residence prior to her living in Poland was agreed to be Australia – where the child has previously lived in Poland for approximately two years – connection to and integration of the child into Poland considered – finding that the father agreed to the child remaining in Poland at the time of separation – final orders made for the return of the child to Poland

  • Stapleton & Bryant [2016] FamCA 242

    15 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – various interim applications for parenting orders – 12 year old girl who has been subject of litigation all of her life – Contact not now occurring despite final orders in 2008 – Father brought contravention application in Federal Circuit Court against the mother which was dismissed – Mother denies father contact – Federal Circuit Court orders family report by private practitioner but that has not occurred – Father seeks a different order – Federal Circuit Court appoints Independent Children's Lawyer and father seeks discharge on the basis of pre-judgment and lack of impartiality – Application fails. Review of Senior Registrar's decision on that issue – Father seeks contact by the child and he and/or his parents – All applications not supported by evidence that would justify such orders – Applications dismissed – Case needs final hearing – First day hearing before a judge ordered.

  • Edwards & Edwards [2016] FamCA 241

    15 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – where parents have poor communication despite extant orders of some years standing – where application is made to vary both parental responsibility and time – where father seeks a change of residence to him and substantially reduced time to mother based on mother and daughter conflict – where expert opines that the problem is the parental conflict – where father exacerbates that conflict – where father found to have inappropriately manipulated daughter – reduced time by father ordered.

  • Re: Emery [2016] FamCA 240

    15 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – SPECIAL MEDICAL PROCEDURE – Where the applicants are the parents of a child diagnosed with Gender Dysphoria – where the applicants seek a finding that the child is Gillick competent to consent to Stage Two treatment for Gender Dysphoria – where the child’s treating medical experts and parents support the child commencing Stage Two treatment – assessment of whether 16-year-old child is Gillick competent to consent to medical treatment – finding that the child is competent to consent and authorised to make his own decision about Stage Two treatment.

  • SCVG & Child Support Registrar [2016] FamCA 239

    19 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – STAY APPLICATION – Where there has been a previous stay order – Where an extension is requested – Where the Full Court is due to hear the matter within a short space of time – Where the stay is granted with conditions

  • Selena & Montez [2016] FamCA 238

    11 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM SPOUSAL MAINTENCE - PROPERTY

  • Perrin & Plott [2016] FamCA 237

    11 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom the children spend time – Parental responsibility – Best interests of the children – Issues of concern in relation to the mother and the father –Mother’s mental health and capacity –Father’s illicit drug use, criminal behaviour, family violence and capacity – Where the father failed to engage with the Contact Service and has not spent time with children – Benefit to the children of a meaningful relationship – No proposal made by the father for therapeutic support or supervision –Need to protect the children from harm – Capacity to provide for the needs of the children – Attitude to the children and responsibilities of parenthood – Best interests of the children to live with the mother and spend no time with the father – Mother to hold sole parental responsibility.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Adjournments – Proceedings on foot for nearly four years – Listed for hearing several times – Father has been given extensive leniency – Non-compliance with directions – Need for finality – Application for adjournment refused – Matter proceeded to final hearing.

  • Lefevre & Lefevre [2016] FamCA 236

    22 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Notice of Discontinuance filed by both the applicant and the respondent – where the matter is in the Magellan List – final orders made dismissing all applications and discharging the Independent Children’s Lawyer

  • Merritt & Holdsworth (No 2) [2016] FamCA 235

    03 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – EVIDENCE – admissibility.

  • Garvey & Jess [2016] FamCA 445

    07 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – FINANCIAL AGREEMENT – Whether financial agreement void for uncertainty – Whether parties entered into an “agreement to agree” – Where the agreement provides for the division of future, joint assets – Where the agreement requires joint assets be divided equally – Application dismissed.

  • Kemal & Sukuraman [2016] FamCA 444

    06 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – RELOCATION ORDER – Whether relocating to India is in the best interests of the child - Whether the child should spend time with the father – Whether the father is able to care for the child – Whether the parties should have equal shared parental responsibility of the child - Where the mother wishes to relocate to India with the child – Where the child suffers from Autism Spectrum Disorder–Where the mother has support of maternal grandparents in India – Where the mother would relocate without the child.

  • Padley & Padley [2016] FamCA 443

    06 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – With whom a child spends time – Best interests of child – Where there is one child of the marriage – Where the Court orders the child to live with the mother and spend time with the father

  • Ahmed & Jeret [2016] FamCA 442

    06 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – Best interests of child – Where there are two children of the relationship – Where the Court orders the mother has sole parental responsibility – Where the Court orders the children live with the mother and spend time with the father

  • Ingram & Ingram [2016] FamCA 441

    18 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Where it became apparent that the father was contemplating not participating to any extent in the final hearing – Where the father was given the opportunity to attend and listen to the proceedings by telephone – Where although it was too late for the father to be an active participant, he did not take up that opportunity to attend and listen by telephone – Where the proceedings proceeded on an undefended basis

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best Interests – Where the parties have three children – Where the oldest is an adult – Where the mother’s application relates to only two of the parties’ children – Where presently the second oldest child lives in the USA with the father and the youngest child lives in Australia with the mother – Where it was agreed that the youngest child should continue to live with the mother and that older child should continue to live with the father in the USA – Where the children have meaningful relationships with both parents – Children’s views – Where given the evidence, it would be counter-productive to make an order forcing the youngest child to travel, which has the potential to be destructive of his relationship with the father – Both children to spend time with their other parent and siblings during school holiday periods in both Australia and the USA

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental Responsibility – Where the mother proposed that the parents should share equally in parental responsibility for each of the children – Where it is certainly an appropriate course given the history of the matter – Parties to have equal shared parental responsibility

  • Hawkins & Hawkins [2016] FamCA 440

    03 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Twelve year marriage and no children – husband made substantial initial capital contribution – Where 10 years elapsed between parties’ final separation and trial whilst wife pursued Supreme Court litigation of what were ultimately found to be “baseless” claims – Where wife unilaterally acted to obtain substantial funds secured against the former matrimonial home to fund litigation – Where wife spent $634,000 on Supreme Court litigation and caused the husband to spend $235,000 – Wife solely responsible for economic consequences of Supreme Court litigation – Where 10 years post-separation period and events to be considered – Assessment of contributions in 12 year marriage and 10 years post-separation – Notional add backs – Post-separation liabilities excluded from notional pool considered in determining adjustment – 60/40 apportionment in husband’s favour for contribution – Section 75(2) factors and adjustment – Just and equitable orders

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Lump sum spousal maintenance

  • Short &Turlison [2016] FamCA 439

    27 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Recovery order sought by father – Order made

  • Ghazel & Ghazel [2016] FamCA 438

    30 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application for costs – Application dismissed

  • Re: Jerry [2016] FamCA 437

    23 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Medical procedure

  • Gibson & Killen (No 3) [2016] FamCA 436

    03 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD – FINAL PARENTING ORDERS – Best interests – applicant mother and Independent Children’s Lawyer seeking final orders on an undefended basis – where the evidence is untested – order made that the mother have sole parental responsibility – order that the child live with the mother and spend no time with the father.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Procedural fairness – where the father has failed to comply with orders – where the father has failed to attend court – where procedural fairness has been afforded to the father and no proposals are made by the father.

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – where costs of mother and Independent Children’s Lawyer previously fixed and reserved to trial – circumstances justifying order – father ordered to pay fixed costs.

  • Commissioner of Taxation & Hong and Anor [2016] FamCA 435

    19 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim injunction restraining parties from dealing with property- Applicant seeking to set aside financial agreement entered into by the Respondents

  • Small & Small [2016] FamCA 433

    02 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – where the parties are in dispute as to the parenting arrangements of the children – where it has been a significant period of time since the father spent any time with the children – where the mother alleges a history of domestic violence and sexual abuse perpetrated by the father against her and the children – where the father denies the allegations – where it is ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility and that the children live with her – where the father’s application is dismissed.

  • Buller & Martin [2016] FamCA 434

    30 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for a Stay of the Order – Application Dismissed

  • Malone & Malone and Ors [2016] FamCA 432

    02 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – interim orders – where the wife seeks orders for the sale of property in addition to interests and funds to be transferred – where the application is opposed by the husband and second and third respondent – where the dispute is a matter of evidence and determination and therefore cannot be dealt with on an interim hearing – where the wife’s application is dismissed – where it is ordered that a single expert be appointed to value the said property.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – interim orders – where the wife seeks an increase in spousal maintenance – where the order is opposed by the husband – where the Court finds that the husband does not have the capacity to pay spousal maintenance in the sum sought by the wife – where the wife’s application is dismissed.

  • Herman & Bosley [2016] FamCA 431

    25 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – JURISDICTION – Consideration of principles – Whether local forum is “clearly inappropriate” – Recognition or enforcement of the other’s orders and decrees – Resolution of the parties’ controversy – Order and stage of local and foreign proceedings – Connection to each jurisdiction – Cost, delay and practical impediments to the conduct of proceedings in Australia – Not satisfied that the Family Court of Australia is a clearly inappropriate forum.

  • Festa & Comer [2016] FamCA 430

    02 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – where the parties are in dispute as to the parenting arrangements of the child – where the father alleges the mother suffers from a long history of mental illness and therefore she is a risk to the child – where of recent date the mother’s time with the child has been subject to supervision – where the Court finds that the mother’s mental health is not in and of itself a barrier to the mother having a relationship with the child – where there is no evidence to suggest the child is at risk of physical harm – where orders are made for the child to live with the father and for him to have sole parental responsibility – where the mother is required to undertake therapy and upon successful completion the child’s time with the mother shall be reinstated.

  • Corla & Tebello [2016] FamCA 429

    02 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – PARENTING ORDERS – where father poses an unacceptable risk of harm – where presumption of equal shared responsibility does not apply – where sole parental responsibility order in favour of the wife – where cultural and religious beliefs have an impact on the child’s best interest – where relationship with the child is outweighed by the negative aspects and experiences which she feels – where father currently resides overseas – where father will communicate and spend time with child as agreed between the parents – where the father will travel to Australia to spend time with the child as agreed between the parents – where father sought to have the assistance of an interpreter – whether father has not shown any signs of difficulty comprehending the communications – where this is the first court event he has requested an interpreter – where father declined to cross-examine any witnesses.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – permanent resident of Australia – where mother seeks father’s consent to the child becoming a permanent resident – where it is in the best interests of the child to have the right to travel overseas and return to Australia.

  • Alfarsi & Elhage [2016] FamCA 428

    02 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – JURISDICTION – Where both parents and children are Australian citizens – Where children were removed from Australia to Iraq by the father in September 2014 – Where agreed that children were habitually resident in Australia at the time of their removal – Where the father asserts that he does not know who is caring for the children in Iraq – 1996 Convention as implemented in the Family Law Act 1975 does not have application – Consideration of habitual residence of the children – Children have remained “habitually resident” in Australia – Satisfied the Court has jurisdiction.

  • Weaver & Maher [2016] FamCA 426

    02 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim Parenting – With whom the children live with – With whom the children spend time – Best interests of the children – Parents’ relationship was characterised by violence, drug use, illegal behaviour and personal conflict – Where the father filed an application for further interim parenting orders while judgment was reserved – Where three of the children have special needs – Where the children have significant relationships with both parents – Issues of risk in each household – Mother to undertake relevant parenting courses – Three eldest children to spend day time with the mother – Youngest child to continue to live with her mother and spend time with the father – Order of equal shared parental responsibility to continue.

  • Spiteri & Walker [2016] FamCA 425

    02 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim proceedings – Where final orders made by consent in 2013 – Where proceedings recommenced by the mother in 2014 –Where both parties seek sole parental responsibility and mother seeks changes to the younger child’s time with the father – Where no significant risk of harm – Where appropriate that parties retain equal shared parental responsibility pending final hearing – Where appropriate that there be no change to the younger child’s time with the father pending final hearing – Where interim orders made in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia restraining the children from engaging in SCUBA diving or other waterborne activities – Where father seeks the restraint to be lifted – Where mother has concerns about the children’s physical fitness for such activity by reason of a history of asthma – Where further medical testing has been recommended to determine the children’s suitability to participate in SCUBA diving and other waterborne activities – Where appropriate that the children undertake such testing.

  • Cotter & Cotter [2016] FamCA 424

    19 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – ENFORCEMENT - Where orders made by consent – Where wife seeks to set aside the orders under s 79A of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where husband seeks to enforce orders made by consent – Where self-executing orders made for the wife to file evidence in support of her application and should she fail to do so her application would stand dismissed – Where wife failed to file or provide to the Court documents as ordered and her application under s 79A was dismissed – Where orders made for husband to be authorised to act on behalf of both parties to give effect to consent orders in part – Where balance of husband’s application for enforcement and costs adjourned to a later date for hearing.

  • Re: Oliver [2016] FamCA 423

    31 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – MEDICAL PROCEDURES – Childhood gender dysphoria – Where the Court declares that the child is competent to consent to the administration of Stage 2 treatment.

  • Winters & McGuigan [2016] FamCA 421

    01 Jun 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – Best interests of child – Where there are two children of the marriage – Where the father alleges the mother has deliberately set out to alienate him from the children – Where the Court orders the father has sole parental responsibility for a year and thereafter the parents have equal shared parental responsibility – Where the Court orders the children live with the father and spend time with the mother

  • Walden & Walden [2016] FamCA 420

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim – Wife’s application for the parties to join in paying for an expert report – Where that application is opposed by the husband – Where the Court is of the view that it is not a proper joint expense – Where the wife is granted leave to adduce evidence of an expert that she retains.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Interim – Application for leave under s 44(3)of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) to commence proceedings for spousal maintenance out of time – Consideration of s 44(4) – Where the wife has not established a case for hardship – Application for leave under s 44(3) is dismissed.

  • White & West [2016] FamCA 419

    27 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the wife seeks that the husband pay her costs on an indemnity basis – Where the costs sought by the wife are in relation to an unsuccessful contravention application by the husband – Where the wife made an offer in writing to settle the contravention proceedings – Where the husband was wholly unsuccessful in his contravention application – Where the parties have been engaged in a long history of litigation – Where the Court is not persuaded that the circumstances warrant an indemnity costs order – Order made that the husband pay the wife’s costs as agreed or as assessed on a party and party basis.

  • McDuff & Seaward [2016] FamCA 416

    11 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – travel overseas – where the father opposes the mother’s application to travel with the children overseas – where the mother is permitted to travel to Asia with the children for a specified period of time – where the mother must ensure the children have appropriate hotel accommodation and do not travel to certain areas within Asia.

  • Kingston & Hiss [2015] FamCA 415

    30 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best interests – Where the children are at an unacceptable risk of emotional abuse in the mother’s care – Where the father has had sole parental responsibility of the children on an interim basis since trial – Where the mother’s time with the children is to be supervised until such time as agreed between the parties. 

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – De facto relationship – Where the mother denied the existence of a de facto relationship to receive Centrelink benefits – Whether just and equitable to make property adjustment orders – Where financial and non-financial contributions during relationship relatively equal – Where the father made a significant initial financial contribution – Where Registry manager ordered to send a copy of orders and reasons to Centrelink.

  • Dave & Karia [2016] FamCA 414

    12 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – NULLITY – where both parties seek a declaration that their marriage is null and void – where the parties are former citizens of India – where they allege to have been under immense pressure from their respective families and in fear of physical harm – where the parties alleged there was no real consent because the marriage was obtained under duress – where the Court finds the parties were not forced to marry – where the application is dismissed.

  • Persall & Lenahan [2016] FamCA 413

    27 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – With whom a child spends time – Parental responsibility – Father’s perpetration of family violence against the mother – Father’s drug use – Children’s exposure to the father’s aberrant conduct – Where the children cannot benefit from time with the father – Where there are significant risk factors in relation to the children spending time with the father – Children to live with the mother and spend no time with the father – Sole parental responsibility to be held by the mother.

  • Bass & Bass and Anor [2016] FamCA 412

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application in a Case – Applications for a stay of orders – Where the applications are in aid of an appeal – Where both applications are dismissed – Where costs of the applications are reserved pending the appeal – Where no evidence of the parties’ financial circumstances is adduced – Whether the applications were wholly unsuccessful – Whether an order for indemnity costs should be made – Where there are no exceptional circumstances which would justify an indemnity order – Where costs are ordered on a party and party basis – Where the father is ordered to indemnify the Child Support Trust against the costs and expenses of the case guardian.

  • Kapicic & Bakal [2016] FamCA 410

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – where the father seeks orders for sole parental responsibility and that the child live with him – where the orders are opposed by the mother – where the father is concerned as to the mother’s mental stability and considers her time with the child should be supervised – where the parties are in dispute as to the child’s health – where the Court finds that the mother’s allegations against the father are scandalous – where the ICL seeks an order that the mother undergo a course of therapy before she is permitted to spend time with the child – where the family consultant support orders in favour of the father – where it is ordered that the father have sole parental responsibility and that the child live with him and spend time with the mother each alternate weekend and during school holidays.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – final orders – where the father seeks a settlement sum – where the mother seeks to retain the former matrimonial home – where it is just and equitable to make an order for property settlement – where consideration is given to contributions – where the mother is required to pay the father a settlement sum.

  • Ferro & Kopel [2016] FamCA 409

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – where the wife seeks an order that she be permitted to relocate with the child to Israel – where the application is opposed by the husband – where the wife is not permitted to relocate – where the parties share parental responsibility but the wife has sole parental responsibility for the child’s education and health – where orders are made for the child to live with the mother and spend substantial and significant time with the father. 

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – final orders – where the husband seeks to retain the residential property – where both parties seek to retain their separate business enterprises – where consideration is given to the value of the assets including the businesses – where consideration is given to contributions including those of the husband’s family and where an adjustment is made in favour of the husband – where the overall adjustment creates a differential in favour of the wife – where the husband is required to pay the wife a settlement sum. 

    FAMILY LAW – JEWISH DIVORCE – where the wife seeks an order that the husband grant her a gett – where consideration is given to the constitutionality of such an order – where the Court does not consider it has the power to make the order sought.

  • Bardsley & Bardsley [2016] FamCA 408

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – Where the wife seeks periodic and lump sum spouse maintenance – Where the husband opposes the orders sought by the wife – Whether the wife is unable to support herself adequately for the purposes of section 72 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where the Court finds the wife is unable to support herself – Whether the husband has the capacity to pay spouse maintenance – Where the Court finds the husband has the capacity to pay periodic spouse maintenance but not lump sum spouse maintenance – Orders made for the husband to pay to the wife periodic spouse maintenance.

  • Miller & Schopenhaur [2016] FamCA 407

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parenting order – interim parenting orders – where mother asserts the father poses an unacceptable risk of sexual harm – where father accepts on an interim basis time should be supervised – where family members may be inappropriate supervisors – where briefing or training of family members will ameliorate any difficulties with family members supervising – where greater weight attached s60B than s60CC of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – where father conceded that presumption of equal shared parental responsibility is inappropriate at this stage – where presumption is not applied or rebutted, the Court is at large to consider what arrangements will best promote the child’s best interests having regard to the objects and principles in s 60B and the primary and secondary considerations in s 60CC.

  • Re Tara [2016] FamCA 406

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – MEDICAL PROCEDURES – Childhood gender dysphoria – Where the Court declares that the child is competent to consent to the administration of Stage 2 treatment.

  • Re: Sara [2016] FamCA 405

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – MEDICAL PROCEDURES – Childhood gender dysphoria – Where the Court declares that the child is competent to consent to the administration of Stage 2 treatment.

  • Selwood & Selwood and Ors (No 2) [2016] FamCA 404

    12 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – distribution of funds – calculations – where orders are made for the distribution of funds.

  • Selwood & Selwood and Ors [2016] FamCA 403

    12 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – joinder – where the Court finds that it is appropriate for the intervener to be joined.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – distribution of funds – where the wife seeks orders in relation to the distribution of funds received from the sale of a property – where the order is opposed by the husband and the intervener – where the matter is adjourned for further consideration of the amount payable to the parties.

  • Gervase & Gervase [2016] FamCA 402

    17 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – Competing applications – Where the wife seeks exclusive occupation of the former matrimonial home – Where the husband seeks exclusive occupation of the former matrimonial home and an investment property owned by the parties – Where the wife seeks that accrued, and future, rental income generated by the investment property be distributed equally between the parties – Where the husband seeks that the rental income be paid to him – Orders made for the husband to remain in the former matrimonial home and have exclusive occupation of the investment property – Orders made for the rental income to be distributed equally between the parties – Orders made for the husband to pay to the wife spousal maintenance.

  • Lin & Nicoll [2016] FamCA 401

    26 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – validity of marriage – where the parties are of South East Asian descent – where the wife brings the application but it is opposed by the husband – where the marriage is valid and a divorce is granted.

  • Hutcheson & Meli [2016] FamCA 400

    25 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – relocation – where the mother seeks an order that she be permitted to relocate – where the father opposes the mother’s application – where the Court finds that the mother would suffer emotionally and psychologically if not permitted to relocate – where consideration is given to the benefit to the child of maintaining a meaningful relationship with both parents – where it is found that it is not in the child’s best interests for the parents to have equal shared parental responsibility – where the mother is permitted to relocate but is required to remain in Australia for a short period to enable the establishment of a relationship between the child and father – where the mother is required to provide security for the father’s travel to spend time with the child.

  • Fabre & Palmer and Anor [2016] FamCA 399

    04 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – FINAL ORDERS – Application by the maternal uncle that he and the mother have equal shared parental responsibility and that the child spend time with him two nights per week – no appearance by the father – where the father has been notified of the proceedings – where there is a history of domestic violence between the mother and the father – where the father is alleged to engage in the use or abuse of drugs – where the mother and the father have mental health issues – where the child has previously been placed with the maternal uncle on an interim accommodation order – where the mother consents to the orders – orders made as sought by the applicant

  • Cole & Cole [2016] FamCA 398

    11 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTION – INTERIM ORDERS – Application by the wife to restrain the husband from leaving the jurisdiction or from disposing with shares – where the purpose of the husband’s travel is not business related – where an undertaking is offered by the wife to meet any loss sustained by the husband due to a delay in his travel arrangements – orders made restraining the husband from leaving the jurisdiction or from disposing of shares for a limited period

  • Nakotoni & Murphy [2016] FamCA 397

    25 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best interests – With whom the child should live – Where the child is very young – Where the child had spent the majority of his life in the care of the mother – Orders made for the child to live with the mother and spend time with the father

  • Laws & Laws and Anor [2016] FamCA 396

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where the wife claims an injunction under s106B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)- where respondent seeks an adjournment of proceedings due to medical reasons – where applicant has to demonstrate there is a serious question to be tried – where balance of convenience favours grant of injunction – where wife claims the purpose of the transfer of shares was to defeat her claims – whether damages are an adequate remedy – where no statutory right to damages is created under that provision – where injunction granted – where respondent has liberty to apply to dissolve injunction on 48 hours’ notice. 

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where respondent seeks transfer of proceedings to the Federal Circuit Court – where s106B of the Family Law Act 1975(Cth) introduces complexity – where matter retained in the Family Court of Australia. 

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – where husband seeks the wife vacate the matrimonial home – where wife has paid to discharge present arears – where it is a matter of commercial judgement of the bank whether the property should be vacated. 

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parenting orders – where husband asserts no substantial matters are left in dispute – where magnitude of differences between the parties is not yet apparent – where it is premature in the proceedings to make an order

  • Tyson & Tyson [2016] FamCA 395

    04 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTIONS – INTERIM ORDERS – Application by the wife to restrain the husband from encumbering real property or from disposing of assets of a company – application neither opposed nor consented to by the husband – issue raised as to the husband’s capacity – orders conceded by the husband’s solicitor as appropriate – where the orders the wife seeks are to preserve the assets of the parties – orders made as sought by the wife

  • Allan & Allan [2016] FamCA 394

    24 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM ORDERS – Application by the husband for sale of real property and refinancing of a mortgage liability – where the husband seeks orders to alleviate his alleged financial difficulties – where there is no evidence to support the husband’s alleged financial difficulties – where the wife seeks to retain the real property sought to be sold by the husband as part of the final property settlement – where the orders proposed by the husband would result in him controlling assets representing a significant proportion of the pool of assets – application refused

  • Vancovich & Dunfield [2016] FamCA 393

    03 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Review of a Registrar’s decision to refuse to make orders by consent on the basis that s 81 was not satisfied – where the parties intend to continue to operate a business jointly – where the parties have both received independent legal advice – final orders made as sought by the parties

  • Dover & Rogers [2016] FamCA 392

    24 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – With whom a child communicates – With whom a child spends time – Allegations of sexual abuse – High level of conflict – Orders that children live with mother and spend time with the father

  • Starcevic & Watson [2016] FamCA 391

    23 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Family violence – standard of proof - definition of “unacceptable risk” - here greater weight attached s60B than s60CC of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) best interest of a child – best interests of the child balanced with perceived risk – mothers fear of husbands violence – where the mother has sole parental responsibility and an order that children spend no time nor communicate with father – where father disengaged from proceedings. 

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – where the father ordered to transfer his title and interest in matrimonial home – where mother indemnify the father in relation to the matrimonial home – whether it is just and equitable that the mother assume all of the parties net liability.

  • Judd & Cornell-Judd [2016] FamCA 390

    19 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Settlement in relation to marriage – Whether it is just and equitable – Identifying the existing interests – Where satisfied there is an outstanding joint liability to the wife’s father – Financial and non-financial contributions – Indirect financial contributions by the wife’s parents – Not satisfied the husband contributed financially by way of an inheritance as he contends– Husband’s conduct resulted in a diminution of the parties’ property pool to payments of debts – Where the wife has the future care and control of the children – Husband has greater income earning capacity and financial resources – Payment of child support uncertain – Husband’s non-disclosure – Greater contributions by the wife and further adjustment in favour of the wife.

  • Helms & Helms [2016] FamCA 389

    23 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Property Settlement – Application for deferral of property proceedings – Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s79(5) – change in financial circumstances – Where the trial Judge’s finding that a significant change within the period of the adjournment would be more likely to do justice as between the parties than an immediate order – where case management principles and the need for expeditious justice with the opportunity for parties to properly present their best case.

  • Strahan & Strahan [2016] FamCA 388

    20 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – trial directions – where the matter is adjourned for the purpose of making trial directions at a later date – where the parties have agreed to participate in private mediation.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – interim orders – where an order is made that the husband pays to the wife’s solicitors a sum for the purpose of payment of legal fees and disbursements – where the parties are required to file updated financial statements – where costs are referred to the trial judge.

  • McMillan & McMillan [2016] FamCA 387

    23 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – S105 Application for enforcement – application by the wife for enforcement of orders – consideration of the discretionary power of the Court to enforce orders pursuant to section 105 of the Family Law Act (Cth) 1975 – where the equitable bar of laches is not applicable – where delay per se does not readily excite equitable intervention – relevance of equitable defences – limitation periods for enforcement of judgement – limitation periods in relation to recovery of interest.

  • Fewster & Hyde [2016] FamCA 385

    10 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW - CHILDREN - Family violence – standard of proof - definition of “unacceptable risk” - here greater weight attached s60B than s60CC of the Family Law Act 1975(Cth) - where the mother has ceased spending time with the children - Where presumption to have equal shared parental responsibility rebutted.

  • Fielding & Doull [2016] FamCA 384

    23 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – CONTRAVENTION – where it is alleged the mother has failed to comply with Orders providing for the children’s time with their father and the exercise of shared parental responsibility – where the allegation of contravention is proved on two counts – where on the third count the mother made a reasonable attempt to comply with the orders of the court – findings of contravention – where the parties will be provided a further opportunity to make submissions as to sanction.

  • Bertram & Bertram [2016] FamCA 383

    20 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – where the parties live in different states – where significant weight is given to the wishes of the children – where it is ordered that the parties have shared parental responsibility but that the father have sole parental responsibility for matters relating to health and education affecting one child – where it is ordered that the children live with the father and spend time with the mother at such times to be agreed between the parties.

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – final orders – where the husband seeks orders by way of property settlement – where the wife opposes the sale of one property – where consideration is given to contributions – where the wife is required to pay the husband a settlement sum – where various ancillary orders are made by way of property settlement.

  • Duarte & Morse [2016] FamCA 381

    28 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Contravention – Contravention application made by the mother against the father alleging a breach with respect to parenting orders – Where the mother seeks an order that the father be restrained from expressing concern about the risk posed to the children by the mother – Where the purpose of contravention proceedings pursuant to Division 13A is examined – Where the mother’s application is for an ulterior purpose – Application dismissed.

  • Padelford & Tsui [2016] FamCA 380

    20 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – INTERIM PROCEEDINGS – Where the father seeks orders that he spend time with the child on a graduated basis, increasing to unsupervised overnight time – Where the mother seeks orders that the father’s time with the child be supervised for two hours per week –Where the child has cerebal palsy and has spent no time with the father in two years – Where there are disputed allegations of family violence – Presumption of equal shared parental responsibility not applied – Orders made for the child to live with the mother – Orders made for the father to spend supervised time with the child.

  • Grandhouse & Grandhouse [2016] FamCA 379

    20 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Summary dismissal – Application by the father for summary dismissal of the mother’s Initiating Application – Where the mother seeks to vary final parenting orders – Where the orders were subject to an appeal by the mother which was subsequently dismissed by the Full Court –Where the orders provided for the mother to seek a variation but subject to her meeting specific conditions –Where the Court finds that the mother has not provided any evidence as to her compliance with those orders – Where the Court finds the application has no reasonable likelihood of success and amounts to an abuse of process under rule 10.12 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) – Orders made summarily dismissing the mother’s Initiating Application.

  • Gregg & Gregg [2016] FamCA 378

    18 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim orders – where the mother has moved the children interstate – where consideration is given to the best interests of the children – where there is a psychologist report in relation to the mother – where the Court finds if the mother was ordered to return to South Australia there would be a risk to the mother’s wellbeing – where the Court orders holiday time in favour of the father.

  • Niven & Derrick [2016] FamCA 377

    20 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best Interests – Where there is a benefit to the child in having a meaningful relationship with both of his parents – Where the current parenting arrangement has become unworkable and intolerable for the child – Where there is a need to protect the child from psychological harm in the mother’s household – Children’s views – Sibling relationships – Where the mother wishes to relocate to the USA and there is a real risk she will not return with the child – Where given all the circumstances of the current matter, the mother has a limited capacity to meet the child’s emotional needs – Where the question becomes which of the parents is more likely to support the relationship with the other parent – Where on balance the father is the one who is likely to do so – Where there will be a positive impact on the child of a change of residence – Child to live with the father – Child to spend time with the mother during school holidays in Australia, following an initial embargo period 

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental Responsibility – Where the communication, consultation and compromise required for equal shared parental responsibility is an impossibility for these two parents – Where whichever parent the child lives with should exercise sole parental responsibility – Father to have sole parental responsibility

  • Lintz & Lintz and Ors [2016] FamCA 376

    31 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – Financial proceedings - objection to subpoena issued at the behest of the husband to the parents of the wife – relevance of documents relating to the parents’ trusts – relevance of parents’ wills – objection not allowed.

  • Lake & Brand [2016] FamCA 375

    20 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – FINAL ORDERS – Asset pool – dispute as to the value of the husband’s interest in his family’s entities and debts alleged by him to be owed to the family entities – where one of the family entities was previously involved in the proceedings and discontinued its application just prior to the hearing – finding that the husband and his family have engaged in a course of action to defeat the wife’s claim 

    FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTIONS – Application by the wife for an injunction pursuant to s 90AE to restrain a third party company of which the husband is a director from instituting proceedings to recover a debt or from attempting to prove the existence of the debt – where the debt is alleged by the husband to be owed to the company – where the evidence does not support the existence of the alleged debt – injunction made restraining the company pursuant to s 90AF

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Waste – where the husband purchased a yacht just prior to separation – where the husband claimed after the commencement of proceedings that the children of the marriage have a 52 per cent share in the yacht – where the wife was not aware of husband vesting any interest in the yacht in the children and did not consent to that course of action – Kowaliw & Kowaliw (1981) FLC 91-092 considered – finding that the husband acted recklessly, negligently or wantonly dealt with matrimonial assets – waste by the husband taken into account pursuant to s 75(2)

  • Acharya & Bhatt [2016] FamCA 374

    27 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim – Spouse maintenance – Application by the wife for interim spousal maintenance – Where the wife lives in the former matrimonial home – Where the husband lives overseas – Where there is some evidence to suggest that the wife has mental health issues – Where the wife has demonstrated a need for financial assistance – Where the husband has some capacity to pay – Orders for spouse maintenance pending further order.

  • Senna & Jensen [2016] FamCA 373

    20 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – SEXUAL ABUSE – Best interests – Whether the children are at an unacceptable risk of sexual abuse in the father’s care – Where the children have made various consistent disclosures – Where the mother has attempted to facilitate a meaningful relationship between the children and their father.

  • Olmos & Morrall [2016] FamCA 372

    04 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for adjournment of a part heard hearing – Where counsel for the father is unavailable and need to brief other counsel – Where application opposed by mother – Where grounds for adjournment do not outweigh prejudice to the mother – Application dismissed

  • Edmund & Belkin [2016] FamCA 371

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – with whom the child lives – with whom the child spends time – where the child is eleven years old – where the mother has historically failed to facilitate and encourage a relationship between the child and her father – whether the mother is able to facilitate a relationship with the father into the future – where the child is ordered to live with her father and spend time with her mother – parental responsibility – where orders are made for equal shared parental responsibility.

  • Harris & Harris (No 3) [2016] FamCA 370

    13 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – ORDERS – variation following contravention application – where both parties seek a variation – where the Court considers it appropriate to make the variation – where orders are made for telephone contact between the children and the mother – where orders are made for the mother to spend time with one of the children subject to that child’s wishes.

  • Stenner & Stenner (No 3) [2016] FamCA 369

    17 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim orders – where the mother seeks orders in relation to the two children including for a change in living arrangements and a mental health care plan – where the father opposes the orders sought – where it is ordered that one child not attend at the handover of the other child – where the remainder of the orders sought are dismissed – where the question of costs is reserved to the trial judge.

  • Kemp & Wood [2016] FamCA 368

    13 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – final orders – undefended hearing – where the mother seeks an order that she be permitted to relocate to the United States of America – where consideration is given to the best interests of the child – where there is a risk of emotional and psychological harm for the child if her and the mother are prevented from relocating – where the father has not engaged in the proceedings nor spent time with the child for some time – where the mother is permitted to relocate – where orders are made for the child to live with the mother and for the mother to have sole parental responsibility.

  • Lennox & Lennox [2016] FamCA 367

    19 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best Interests – Where the children’s relationships with the mother are important and valuable to them – Where the nature of the eldest child’s relationship with the father means she derives little, if any, benefit from it and maintenance of that relationship is liable to cause her psychological harm – Where much the same may be said of the relationship between the youngest child and the father – Where the evidence proved the father was an oppressively violent domestic partner – Where the evidence of family violence stops around the time of the parties’ separation, well over three years ago, and accordingly there is no current need to protect the children from any psychological harm from exposure to family violence committed by the father – Where the father demonstrated no tangible change in his attitude or insight into his past actions – Children to live with the mother – Where orders requiring the children to spend more, unsupervised time with the father would certainly be detrimental to the mother’s emotional stability – Where the children should not be treated differentially and so the orders must be a compromise between the needs and desires of both children – Children to spend supervised time with the father on two occasions each year – Where occasional written communication between the father and the children is permitted – Where otherwise the father is restrained from approaching the mother’s residence or any school attended by either child

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Parental Responsibility – Where the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility does not apply because of the proven family violence between the parties – Where such an order would not be in the children’s best interests – Where the party with whom the children live should have exclusive parental responsibility – Mother to have sole parental responsibility

  • Hogan & Mallory [2016] FamCA 366

    19 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Procedural Fairness – Where the respondent wife disengaged from the proceedings and the trial proceeded on an undefended basis – Where the wife was afforded procedural fairness 

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Where it is just and equitable to adjust the parties’ existing property interests – Where the applicant husband’s overall contributions outweighed those of the wife – Where the parties will retain their own superannuation interests of relatively equivalent value and their property interests are divided by apportionment of 75 per cent to the husband and 25 per cent to the wife

  • Veitch & Dempsey [2016] FamCA 365

    06 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim orders – where the father seeks a variation of the orders made by consent – where there is a family report – where consideration is given to the best interests of the children – where an order is made for an autism assessment – where orders are made for one child to live with the father and spend time with the mother on a week about basis subject to his wishes – where orders are made for therapy.

  • Southwell & Sargent [2016] FamCA 364

    13 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – interim orders – where the mother seeks an order that she be permitted to travel with the child to Greece and that the father pay the costs of the child’s return airfare – where consideration is given to Greece being a Hague Convention country – where the mother is permitted to travel with the child – where the father is ordered to pay the mother a sum by way of partial property settlement.

  • Canvil & Merle and Ors [2016] FamCA 363

    29 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – JOINDER – where orders are sought against real property - where it is claimed that the property is held on trust – where the purported beneficial owners of the property are joined to proceedings.

  • Fleming & Fleming [2016] FamCA 362

    18 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Release and use of expert report – Where the father seeks the release of the single expert report for use in Apprehended Violence Order proceedings brought against him in the New South Wales Local Court – Where the Apprehended Violence Order sought by the police lists the children as protected persons – Whether the implied obligation applies to the single expert report – Consideration of Sahadi & Savva and Anor [2016] FamCAFC 65 – Where the Court finds the implied obligation does not apply to the single expert report – Whether in exercising the Court’s discretion the single expert report should be released – Where the Court finds it is not in the public interest for single expert reports to be released without redaction and without an undertaking being provided to seek a non- publication order.

  • Dickens & Dickens (No 2) [2016] FamCA 361

    04 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim – Where the father seeks a stay of the operation and enforcement of orders until the appeals are dealt with – Where the father seeks an order that a decision to refuse his request for a subpoena be set aside – Where the mother and the Independent Children’s Lawyer oppose the orders sought by the father – Where not granting the stay does not render nugatory the appeals against refusal to disqualify and refusal to remove the Independent Children's Lawyer – Where it is not in the best interests of the children to grant a stay of the order for the expert’s report– Where it is not appropriate for the father to cross-examine witnesses outside the process of the final hearing – Where the father’s two applications in a case are dismissed.

  • Sullivan & Cunez (No 2) [2016] FamCA 360

    13 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Small Asset Pool - Superannuation – Post separation liabilities not taken into account

  • Sullivan & Cunez [2016] FamCA 359

    13 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Where the mother alleges that the paternal grandfather, the father and others had engaged in sexual misconduct against their daughter – Where the mother’s belief pertaining to the alleged abuse is driven by various statements made by the child – Where the child made inconsistent statements to police, family members and others - Where the mother is the primary carer of the children – Where the evidence is insufficient to establish the risk as unacceptable in terms of the father. Consideration of risks in terms of the paternal grandfather and risks in moving the primary residence of the daughter to the full time care of the father.

  • Canvil & Merle [2016] FamCA 358

    22 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – international travel – whether the mother ought to be permitted to travel overseas with the children.

  • Sandberg & Sandberg [2016] FamCA 357

    17 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Interim – Application by the wife pursuant to sections 72 and 74 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) that the husband pay her weekly spousal maintenance – Where there is one child who resides with the husband in the former matrimonial home – Where the wife works on a casual basis – Where the husband submitted that the wife has a much greater earning capacity than her current income – Where the Court is of the view that the wife does not have a greater earning capacity – Where the wife is unable to support herself adequately on her current income – Where the wife’s weekly expenses leave her with a shortfall – Where the husband’s weekly expenses leave him with a surplus – Orders made that the husband pay to the wife $204 per week by way of interim spousal maintenance until the wife receives proceeds of the sale of the former matrimonial home – Where such an amount will have the effect that both parties experience a similar weekly financial shortfall.

  • Southers & Southers (No 3) [2016] FamCA 356

    03 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim – Spouse maintenance – Application by the husband to vary spouse maintenance orders – Where urgent spouse maintenance orders had previously been made– Where the wife has made efforts to obtain paid employment – Where the wife has demonstrated a need for financial assistance – Where the Court finds that husband has the capacity to pay – Order made for interim spouse maintenance pending further order – Order made that the wife provide to the husband evidence of her efforts to obtain paid employment.

  • Sexton & Sexton [2016] FamCA 355

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Superannuation – Where the parties were in agreement that a splitting order should be made, whereby the wife would receive 100 per cent of the husband’s interest – Where the trustee of the superannuation fund was afforded procedural fairness – Where the Court finds that it is just and equitable for such an order to be made. 

    FAMILY LAW – ADULT CHILD MAINTENANCE – Where the wife sought adult child maintenance – Where the adult child is autistic and entirely dependent on the wife – Where the Court finds the husband has the capacity to pay maintenance – Orders made for the husband to pay adult child maintenance at the termination of the current child support assessment.

    FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Where the wife sought spousal maintenance – Where the Court finds the wife is unable to support herself for the purposes of section 72 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where the Court finds the husband does not have the capacity to pay maintenance after meeting an order for adult child maintenance – Application dismissed.

  • Viola & Latham and Ors [2016] FamCA 354

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application for costs of proposed respondents arising out of the wife’s unsuccessful action for leave to bring proceedings on behalf of companies pursuant to s 237 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – whether the wife’s application was an application pursuant to the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) or the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – held that the wife’s application is not an application incidental to the property proceedings between she and the husband – where the proposed respondents are not parties to the property proceedings – finding that costs should follow the event – interim orders made for the wife to pay the costs of the proposed second and third respondents forthwith

  • Ramsey & Hays [2016] FamCA 353

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – With whom a child lives – With whom a child spends time – Parental responsibility – Best interests of the child – Child has lived with the father since 2011 – Significant issues of the mother’s mental health – Allegation of child abuse perpetrated by the paternal uncle – Concerns in relation to the mother’s husband – Child to live with the father and spend time with the mother – Father to hold parental responsibility.

  • Milovic & Banks [2016] FamCA 352

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – INTERIM ORDERS – Limited issue – June/July school holidays – where the father seeks equal time with both children – where the mother seeks that the father’s time with the child with special needs be limited – evidence of the family consultant considered – orders made for the children to spend equal time with the mother and father over the school holidays on a graduated basis

  • Greenhill & Carter [2016] FamCA 351

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim Parenting – With whom the children live with – Where the mother seeks to relocate the children within NSW – Where the children have well established relationships with both parents – Risk associated with the father’s history of drug use – The effect of the proposed change and relocation on the children – Significant practical difficulty due to the distance between the parents – Order for equal shared parental responsibility by consent – Father with drug testing orders and re-engage with his mental health practitioner.

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appeal from Local Court – Hearing de novo.

  • Erington & Erington [2016] FamCA 350

    14 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERIM ORDERS – Application by the husband for sale the parties’ business – where the bank has issued a notice of default as a result of the business’ failure to meet its obligations to the bank – where the wife seeks that receivers be appointed – where an offer has been made by a party to purchase the business – orders made as sought by the husband pursuant to s 114

  • Akbar & Akbar (No 2) [2016] FamCA 349

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application by the wife that the husband pay her costs reserved in a fixed sum from a previous hearing date – where the husband has repeatedly failed to file material – where the husband has failed to comply with court orders – where the husband’s failure to file material by the previous hearing date likely meant that parts of the wife’s application which were not agreed could not proceed on that day – interim orders made for costs in a fixed sum

  • Sadko & Coleman [2016] FamCA 348

    16 May 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Undefended hearing – where the applicant has failed to comply with court orders – where the applicant failed to appear at the hearing – consideration of the principles in Division 12A of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – leave granted to proceed on an undefended basis. 

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – FINAL ORDERS – Application for final parenting orders heard on an undefended basis – where the mother’s whereabouts are unknown – where the mother failed to appear at the hearing – where the mother has a history of mental illness and illicit drug use – where the father seeks to return to his country of employment with the child – where the child had previously been living primarily with the father – orders made that the father have sole parental responsibility, that the child live with the father and that the child have telephone and skype contact with the mother.

  • Selen & Selen and Anor [2016] FamCA 346

    07 Mar 2016

    FAMILY LAW – BANKRUPTCY – Application to extend the life of a creditor’s petition pursuant to section 52(5) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) – Where bankruptcy proceedings were transferred from the Federal Circuit Court of Australia to the Family Court of Australia under section 35(2A) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) – Where the creditor is the wife in the family law proceedings – Where the debtor is the son of the wife and the deceased husband – Where the debtor is involved in the family law proceedings in his capacity as administrator of the deceased husband’s estate – Where the debt arises from outstanding costs ordered following unsuccessful appeals to the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia and the High Court of Australia – Whether it is just and equitable to extend the life of the creditor’s petition – Where the prejudice to the creditor is greater than the prejudice to the debtor in circumstances where the debtor had sought the transfer of the bankruptcy proceedings – Application granted.

  • Janssen & Janssen [2016] FamCA 345

    01 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – EVIDENCE – Admissibility – Admissibility of audio recordings made by the mother of exchanges between the parties in circumstances where the recordings were made without the consent of the father – Admissibility of transcripts of the audio recordings – Where the Court finds the audio recordings fall within the exception contained in sub-section 7(3)(b) of the Surveillance Devices Act 2007 (NSW) as the recordings were reasonably necessary to protect the lawful interests of the mother – Where the Court exercises its discretion to admit the audio recordings and transcripts into evidence – Certificate issued to the mother pursuant tosection 128 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth).

    FAMILY LAW – EVIDENCE – Application by the father under section 69ZT(3) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) for the provisions of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) to apply – Where there are serious allegations of family violence made against the father – Where the Court is satisfied ‘exceptional’ circumstances apply – Rules of evidence to apply to evidence given in respect of events on a specific date and alleged threats made by the father concerning the children.

  • Southers & Southers (No 2) [2016] FamCA 344

    15 Feb 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM SPOUSE MAINTENANCE – Application by the wife for urgent spouse maintenance – Where the wife has demonstrated an immediate need for financial assistance – Where the Court finds that the husband has a capacity to pay – Order for temporary spouse maintenance pending further order made pursuant to s 77 of the Family Law Act 1975(Cth).

  • Sampey & Sampey and Anor [2016] FamCA 343

    11 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – REVIEW OF REGISTRAR’S DECISION– OBJECTION TO SUBPOENA – Where certain objections made by the respondents to subpoenas issued by the wife were upheld by the Registrar – Where the wife seeks a review of the Registrar’s orders – Where the respondents dispute the relevance of the documents sought to the proceedings between the husband and the wife – Where the respondents assert that compliance with the subpoena would be oppressive and may reveal confidential information – Where the wife asserts the documents sought are necessary to ascertain the true financial position of the husband – Where the Court finds that the documents may be relevant to the proceedings

  • Duarte & Morse and Anor [2016] FamCA 342

    11 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PARENTING – Whether the mother should spend time with the children unsupervised – Where the children have been removed from the mother’s care by NSW State Courts – Where there has been supervised time previously – Where there are concerns as to risks posed in the mother’s household – Where there has been not opportunity to test the evidence in relation to the risks posed – Where the children have not spent time with the mother in a significant period of time – Where the final hearing is not to take place for some time

  • Fegley & Salway (No 2) [2016] FamCA 341

    15 Apr 2016

    FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PARENTING – Whether the 13 year old child should spend more time with the mother – Where the child has not spent time with the mother for a considerable period – Where the child has made allegations about mother – Where the child has expressed views about spending time with the mother – Where two younger children spend time/live with the mother – Where there is a high conflict relationship between the parents.