FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the applicant mother has not filed substantive material in over two years and failed to appear at trial – Where leave is granted for the respondent father to proceed on an undefended basis as against the mother – Where the father and the Independent Children’s Lawyer agree upon final parenting orders to be made – Where the mother has an extensive history of illicit drug use and mental illness and has not put any current material in relation thereto before the Court – Where the children were removed from the mother’s care in 2024 and placed into the care of the father and paternal grandmother by the Department of Families, Fairness and Housing – Where the mother has not spent unsupervised time with the children since their removal from her care – Where there is an extensive history of allegations and cross-allegation of family violence by each parent – Where allegations of sexual abuse against the father were fabricated at the instigation of the mother – Where the mother is diagnosed with mental illness – Where persistent contraventions of intervention orders by the mother led to a Community Corrections Order being made against her – Where the mother has not spent any time with the children since early 2026 notwithstanding orders permitting her to do so – Where final parenting orders are made by consent as between the father and the Independent Children’s Lawyer for the children to live with the father and spend professionally supervised time with the mother for two hours each quarter.

FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Where the husband seeks that the wife pay him periodic spousal maintenance for four years – Consideration of the obligations of disclosure codified in s 71B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where the obligation extends to disclosure of all relevant and material facts, including both documents and information – Where issue existed as to the historic and current income, income earning capacity, property and financial resources of each party – Consideration of how to treat financial disclosure failures – Where it is important to engage with the particular facts of the disclosure failures and the inferences that should be drawn from them – Where compliance with obligations of disclosure has implications for evidentiary outcomes – Where failure to comply with the duty by incomplete or inadequate disclosure is relevant to the assessment of evidence, the drawing of inferences and bears on the question of discharge of an onus of proof – Where the husband bears the onus of fact proving his reasonable periodic needs and the extent to which he is unable to support himself – Where the husband has not discharged that evidentiary onus – Husband’s application dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Affidavits – Where the father sought to adduce a further affidavit late into the proceedings – Where the nature of the evidence he sought to adduce has been dealt with in the proceedings – Where the admission of the evidence would further delay the proceedings – Where the affidavit was not permitted to be adduced.

FAMILY LAW – EVIDENCE – Waiving privilege – Where the mother was previously represented and her lawyers had to withdraw for ethical reasons – Where the mother was unable to produce evidence central to her argument – Whether the mother waived her litigation privilege –Where the mother asserts she did not waive her privilege – Where the mother waived her privilege.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Short-form reasons for second interim parenting judgment within two months – Where single expert witness stresses that the significance of the child’s attempted suicide cannot be overestimated – Where parties agree to seek interim orders only and forego cross-examination of each other at this stage in the proceedings – Where single expert opines that it is essential that parents undergo therapy with each other, and him, and that any reintroduction of the father to the oldest child (who had attempted suicide) must await therapeutic intervention between the parents – Where single expert witness estimates that it would be at least four months before the father could commence spending time with the oldest child, and then only in therapy – Where younger child presents very differently to her sister and where her disposition supports an immediate reintroduction of time between herself and the father and the paternal grandparents – Where both siblings are to spend time with paternal grandparents but the father is not to be an ingredient of the oldest child’s time with the paternal grandparents pending further order of the court or agreement between the parties – Where interim orders made for parents to have therapy with single expert witness followed by the father and oldest child to have therapy to repair their relationship, and possible, but not compulsory, time between the two thereafter – Adjournment for four months for case management hearing and final hearing to commence in eight months.

FAMILY LAW – Harmful proceedings order – application for leave to institute further proceedings – alleged contraventions of final parenting orders – no sufficient basis for leave – proposed proceedings vexatious – application dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Ex-tempore reasons – Implied undertaking – Harman undertaking – Application for release from undertaking – Where the applicant father seeks to use most recent single expert family report from family law proceedings in pending Magistrates’ Court family violence order proceedings – Where the first respondent mother seeks to use documents and material from family law proceedings in pending Magistrates’ Court family violence order proceedings – Where it is appropriate that the Magistrate have access to all documents in the current proceedings from a certain date, subject to certain restrictions – Orders made as sought by the mother.

FAMILY LAW – MAJOR COMPLEX FINANCIAL PROCEEDINGS LIST – PROPERTY – ASSET PRESERVATION ORDER – order made pending further hearing of this application.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Relocation – Where the father seeks for the children to be permitted to relocate with him to Country C – Where the mother consents to the relocation in respect of the older child but opposes the relocation in respect of the younger child – Where the parties and the children are dual citizens of Australia and Country C – Where there are adult children not the subject of the proceeding who have relocated or will relocate to Country C – Where the older child the subject of the proceeding has a strong wish to relocate to Country C – Where the mother says the younger child’s developmental needs will not be met in Country C – Where the father disputes the characterisation of the younger child’s developmental needs – Where the mother did not advance an alternative position if her application to remain living with the younger child in Australia is not acceded to – Where finding that it is in the best interests of the children for them to be permitted to relocate to Country C.

PROPERTY – Where the parties own assets and liabilities in Australia and in Country C – Where the parties each received partial property payments during the currency of the proceedings – Where the wife sought to notionally add back property to the pool – Where finding that the husband has significant financial resources in Country C and a greater income earning capacity – Where finding that the parties’ contributions are assessed as equal – Where finding that the parties’ current and future circumstances warrant an adjustment in the wife’s favour – Where finding that the net asset pool should be divided 62/38 in favour of the wife – Where finding that the wife should receive periodic spousal maintenance for a fixed period.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Subpoenas – objections to production – subpoenas issued by wife to entities associated with husband’s family business structures – third-party trusts and corporate entities – apparent relevance – legitimate forensic purpose –distinction between documents concerning structure, governance and control and broad financial records directed to valuation – objections upheld.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the Independent Children’s Lawyer (“the ICL”) has sought to be discharged consequent upon the mother’s conduct preventing the ICL from discharging its statutory function – Where the ICL made an application for each parent to contribute to its costs – Where the application for the father to contribute to the ICL’s costs is dismissed – Where the circumstances justify an order that the mother pay the ICL’s costs from her entitlement pursuant to s 79 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) when it is realised.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Requests to attend by electronic means – Where the witnesses are located in China but propose to give evidence via video link from Country KK – Discussion of relevant law – Circumstances require the giving of evidence via video link – Where the evidence is relevant to issues in the proceedings – Where the evidence is not permitted to be given from China – No impediment to evidence being given from Country KK – Leave granted.

FAMILY LAW – NULLITY – Consent – Where the applicant asserts she was not capable of giving real consent to the marriage due to mental illness and inebriation – Where the respondent submitted to the application by way of a Submitting Notice – Where the evidence supports a finding that the applicant was not capable of giving real consent – Where finding that the marriage is void – Where finding that the application for nullity be granted.

FAMILY LAW – ENFORCEMENT – Where the Applicant sought that the Respondent be ordered, by way of enforcement, to enter into commercial leases – Where the terms of those leases were previously in dispute – Where the Applicant sought that the Respondent pay outstanding rent and electricity despite no formal leases being in place – Where the Applicant sought that the Respondent personally repay monies paid to a Trust by a lessee – Where the Respondent sought the Application be dismissed – Where orders are made for the Applicant and Respondent to enter into commercial leases.

FAMILY LAW – APPOINTMENT OF LITIGATION GUARDIAN – Where the parties consent to the appointment of a litigation guardian for the third respondent – Consideration of the evidence supporting the appointment of a litigation guardian – Litigation guardian appointed.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the child has only spent professionally supervised time with the Father for more than two years – Where the child is five years old – Where the Mother has always been the child’s primary carer – Where the Mother initially sought a finding that the Father had sexually abused the child – Where at the conclusion of the hearing the Mother did not seek a finding of sexual abuse nor a finding of unacceptable risk of sexual abuse – Where the Mother genuinely believes that the child has been sexually abused by the Father – Where findings made that the Father perpetrated family violence including of a coercive and controlling kind – Where the Mother sought a finding that the child is at unacceptable risk of harm other than sexual harm in the care of the Father – Where the Father and the Independent Children’s Lawyer contend that the child is at unacceptable risk of emotional and psychological harm in the care of the Mother arising from her fixed false belief that the child has been sexually abused by the Father – Where the Father and the Independent Children’s Lawyer seek orders for a change of residence – Where the Mother seeks orders that the child spend no time and have no communication with Father or limited daytime only as an alternative – Where Arrighetti & Qodirova (2026) FLC 94-292 considered – Where “Re Andrew cases” considered – Where the child is not at unacceptable risk in the unsupervised care of the Father – Where risks to the child of a change of residence outweigh risks to the child of remaining in the primary care of the Mother with unsupervised time to the Father – Where orders made for the child to remain living with the Mother – Where orders made for the child to spend gradually increasing overnight time with the Father – Where certain restraints made against both parents.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the husband filed an Application in a Proceeding seeking leave to put additional documents and information to the single Country L real property valuation expert appointed pursuant to ch 7 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) (“the Rules”) – Where there has been significant delay in the expert providing his reports – Where it is unknown as to whether the husband’s contentions, if put to the expert, will further delay the publication of the reports – Where the husband can put his contentions to the expert after the reports have been published for the purposes of clarification by adopting the procedures contained in Div 7.1.6 of the Rules and can test the assumptions upon which the expert’s opinion are based in cross-examination – Where it is not in the interest of the progression of the litigation to further delay for an unknown period of time the reports to be produced by the ch 7 single Country L real property valuation expert – Application in a Proceeding dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Wastage – Where husband improperly removed funds from the parties’ self-managed superannuation fund as part of concocted transactions in order to defeat wife’s claim – Where wife faces ongoing exposure to risk as a consequence of husband’s actions – Where adjustment in favour of wife found to be just and equitable.

COSTS – Indemnity costs – Where husband found to have colluded with his current partner, concocted transactions and falsified documents in order to defeat wife’s interests – Where vast portions of husband’s evidence was implausible and lacking in credibility – Where husband’s misconduct, non-disclosure and obfuscation caused substantial delays and significantly increased wife’s costs.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the father seeks sole decision-making responsibility for major long-term issues and for the children to live with him and spend time with the mother – Where the mother seeks sole decision-making responsibility for major long-term issues and for the children to live with her and spend time with the father – Where the mother unilaterally relocated with the children – Where the parties allege family violence occurred – Where the father submits that the mother poses an unacceptable risk of harm to the children – Where the mother alleges that the father and paternal family are members and/or leaders of a cult – Where the mother alleges coercive control by the father – Where the evidence does not support the mother’s allegations – Where interim orders were made for a change of residence for the children from the mother’s care to the father’s care – Final orders for the children to live with the father and spend time with the mother.

FAMILY LAW – SEPARATE ISSUES HEARING – Separate issue hearing to determine beneficial interests in a real property as between four parties – Compromise during the trial – Consideration of s 78 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) and accrued jurisdiction as to the existence of a joint endeavour constructive trust – Orders made.

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – 15 year relationship – Where the married parties had two children together – Where the husband was the prime mover behind the establishment of a business in the resource sector – Where the various corporate and other entities established by the parties operated the business in Australia and overseas –Where the wife made multiple allegations of fraud against the husband – Where none of the wife’s allegations against the husband have been proved – Where the Court concluded that the husband has not behaved dishonestly – Where there was a dispute between the parties as to the value to be ascribed to the business – Where the expert evidence is accepted by the Court as to the valuation of business – Where the valuation date accepted by the Court was a date some years prior to the final hearing but where there was no acceptable alternative valuation available – A consideration of contributions; present and future circumstances and justice and equity – A consideration of the principles which ought to be followed by counsel and solicitors before making allegations of fraud.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the mother alleged that the father had sexually abused the child – Where criminal proceedings against the father had been withdrawn by the Crown – Where this Court concluded by way of a positive finding that the father had not at any time sexually abused the child – Where the mother alleged that she had been raped by the father on two occasions – Where a District Court jury found the father not guilty of those charges – Where this Court came to a conclusion there was insufficient evidence to make a finding that the father had raped the mother, although the Court was able to conclude that the father was a credible witness – Where the Court also concluded that the evidence of the mother, in relation to many aspects of the proceedings, was most unsatisfactory – Where, during the course of the final hearing, the mother (on day three) made certain crucial concessions including concessions that the father had not sexually abused the child and including concessions that the residence of the child should change (to the father) and that there should be a moratorium of the mother’s time and communication with the child and a concession that there should also be a period of supervised time between the child and the mother – Where the Court concluded that it was in the best interests of the child to live with the father – and that there should be: the imposition of a moratorium of the mother’s time and communication with the child for a period of five months and a seven month period whereby the child’s time with the mother would be supervised before eventually moving to a regime of unsupervised time – Where the Court considered the risk of emotional harm being caused to the child by the mother – Where the Court considered the question of risk generally – Orders made in accordance with the submissions made on behalf of the Independent Children’s Lawyer.

FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application for costs of a stay application on an indemnity basis and in the alternative, costs calculated pursuant to Schedule 3 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 – Where the Court is satisfied that there are circumstances, which justify an order for costs – Where the Court is not satisfied that the circumstances justify an order for indemnity costs – Where the Court makes an Order for costs calculated by reference to Schedule 3 of the Rules.

COSTS – Application for costs arising from the Court’s decision to set aside all or part of subpoenas –Where the Court makes an Order for costs calculated by reference to Schedule 3 of the Rules.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the father sought an injunction to protect a potential witness to be called by him at final hearing – Where the evidence filed by the father in support of the application was not compelling – Application dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – COSTS – parenting and property proceedings – disclosure failures – non-compliance with orders – subpoena process – whether circumstances justified costs order – standard and indemnity costs ordered.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – COSTS – Where final property and parenting orders were made – Where the wife seeks her costs on an indemnity basis – Where the husband’s conduct as a litigant during the proceedings caused unnecessary costs to be incurred – Where the husband’s conduct as a litigant caused the completion of the final hearing to be delayed - Where the wife made an offer to resolve the financial proceedings in a sum less than the amount awarded to her – Where the husband’s offer in relation to the competing parenting applications did not represent a genuine compromise – Husband to pay the costs incurred by the wife including counsel fees for a defined period.

FAMILY LAW – NULLITY – Where a decree of nullity is sought – Respondent husband remarried prior to his previous divorce taking effect – Marriage is void.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the adult son of the parties (“the interested person”) filed an Application in a Proceeding seeking a stay of proceedings pursuant to s 79 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) between the legal personal representatives of his late father’s estate and his mother, that the s 79 trial be vacated and other relief, pending determination of his applications for special leave to the High Court of Australia – Where the applications for special leave are prima facie incompetent – Consideration of s 55 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia 2021 (Cth) and s 73 of the Constitution – Where the prospects of special leave cannot be regarded as substantial – Where the interested person’s submission that a failure to make orders as sought will render his applications for special leave nugatory is not accepted – Where the balance of convenience favours the parties to the s 79 proceedings – Application in a Proceeding dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the mother filed an application to re-open the evidence in a substantial way – Where the father opposed the application – Where the father contended that the application lacks adequate justification, would cause significant prejudice to him, and cause unnecessary delay to the resolution of proceedings – Where the Independent Children’s Lawyer was neutral on the application – Where the Court adopted the position of the father – Where the application is dismissed and the question of costs will be determined upon the proper application being filed.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Interim Hearing – Application for Review – Where the father sought a review of interim orders made by a Senior Judicial Registrar – Where the relevant orders provided for the children to spend equal time with the mother and the father, among other things – Where the mother opposed the Application for Review and sought that the interim orders remain extant – Where the father says that the mother poses an unacceptable risk of harm to the children – Where finding that the mother does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to the children – Where finding that the children should live with the father and spend five nights per fortnight with the mother pending Final Hearing.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the parties reached final orders by consent prior to any party being cross-examined – Where the orders sought included that the parents be restrained from bringing the children into contact with the maternal aunt – Where the Court was ultimately persuaded such an order would give the best chance of success to implementation of the orders sought by consent – Where final orders are made in the best interests of the children.

FAMILY LAW – MAJOR COMPLEX FINANCIAL PROCEEDINGS LIST – interlocutory application by the husband for orders in respect of six parcels of real estate – wife is currently undergoing treatment for a highly aggressive form of cancer – application refused.

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Recognition of foreign orders – Where orders made in the United States of America conflict with earlier property settlement orders made in Australia – Where the applicant is now deceased – Whether the foreign judgment is recognised at common law – Where the foreign judgment is prima facie entitled to enforcement in Australia – Whether any of the available defences to enforcement of the foreign judgment are established – Where enforcement of the foreign judgment is refused because it would contravene public policy.

FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PROPERTY – Whether the matter should proceed without hearing from the wife – Consideration of requirements of disclosure and the impacts on the interests of justice – Application heard on its merits – Whether the wife should receive an interim property distribution – Where the parties have substantial assets – Where the wife is the beneficiary of a testamentary trust – Consideration of the terms of the testamentary trust – Where it is appropriate to make an interim property distribution.

FAMILY LAW – VALUATION – Whether the husband’s potential adversarial expert should be permitted to inspect a property – Wife directed to facilitate access.

SUBPOENAS – Notice of Objection - Whether the wife should have first access to documents returned on subpoena by medical treaters – First access granted.

FAMILY LAW – APPLICATION FOR VARIATION AND DISCHARGE OF INTERIM ORDERS – Where the Wife relies upon spousal maintenance payments in circumstances where she lives with significant disabilities and is not in paid employment – Where the Husband has not complied with interim spousal maintenance orders and “dollar-for-dollar” costs orders made by consent – Where the Wife sought to enforce the interim spousal maintenance orders and “dollar-for-dollar” costs orders and that matter was resolved – Where the Husband seeks variation and discharge of the interim orders – Where the Husband claimed changed financial circumstances – Where the Husband’s evidence about his income and borrowing capacity does not enable a finding that his financial circumstances have changed so as to justify variation or discharge of the spousal maintenance orders – Where the Court is not persuaded that it is just to discharge the “dollar-for-dollar” costs orders – Application dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the husband was ordered to attend in person at the listing of an interlocutory application and case management event and elected not to do so – Where the husband made no application to attend the listing electronically – Where the parties were put on notice in orders made on 12 May 2026 as to the Court making orders on its own motion pursuant to r 10.27 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) (“the Rules”) in the event of a failure or neglect of the parties to comply with orders and/or the Rules – Where the husband has failed to respond to requests for disclosure made by the wife in March 2026 – Where the husband failed to comply with orders requiring him to contribute to the parties’ joint working balance sheet – Consideration of s 95 and s 96 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) and r 1.04 of the Rules – Orders made striking out the husband’s substantive relief and providing for the wife to proceed on an undefended basis.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – where two proceedings involving similar factual issues were consolidated – where the two children are half-siblings and live separately in the care of the applicant and the second respondent – where the first respondent’s partner presents a risk of physical or psychological harm, including harm arising from exposure to family violence to both children – where it was found that it was in the children’s best interests that they remain living with the applicant and respondent’s care – where the first respondent was restrained from bringing the children in contact with her partner.

FAMILY LAW – Ex-tempore Reasons – Hearing of wife’s Application in a Proceeding – Where the proceedings were adjourned as a result of the wife’s non-attendance at Court – Where the wife provided a medical certificate to the Court from C Medical Facility in explanation for her non-attendance – Where the wife had filed material the evening prior to the hearing date – Where the husband sought that the wife file an affidavit particularising details of her attendance at C Medical Facility – Where the husband sought opportunity to reply to late-filed material – Orders made as sought by the husband – Proceedings adjourned – Costs reserved.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the unrepresented father made an oral application for an adjournment on the first morning of the trial – Where that application was dismissed and reasons were provided on 15 June 2026 – Where the Court heard submissions from the parties as to how the final hearing should proceed, in view of the fact that the father had failed to file a trial affidavit in accordance with the trial directions – Where the Court decided to proceed in accordance with rule 10.27(1)(g) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) – Where the Court heard submissions from both parties and from the Independent Children’s Lawyer – Where the Court considered extensive evidence in relation to family violence perpetrated by the father – Where the father spent time in prison after pleading guilty to serious criminal offences against a subsequent partner in a domestic setting – Where the father failed to show any insight into his conduct – Where the Court came to the conclusion that, in the best interests of the children, there should be no time spent between the children and the father and there should be no communication between the children and the father.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – where the children lived with the applicant and spent five nights a fortnight with the respondent – where the applicant considers that the respondent has sexually abused the children or has exposed them to behaviour reminiscent of sexual abuse – where the respondent denies any wrongdoing and contends that the applicant presents a risk of psychological and emotional harm to the children by reason of her beliefs and actions – where it was found that the applicant had unshakable beliefs about the respondent sexually abusing the children -where the applicant presents an unacceptable risk of harm to the children - where it was ordered that the respondent have sole parental responsibility, there be a moratorium of time the children spend with the applicant, and that the children spend long-term supervised time with the applicant.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the father seeks joint decision-making responsibility for major long-term issues and for the children to live with the mother and spend time with him – Where the mother seeks sole decision-making responsibility for major long-term issues and for the children to live with her and spend no time with the father – Where the mother unilaterally suspended time between the children and the father – Where the mother alleges that the father perpetrated sexual abuse against the children – Where the allegations of child sexual abuse were investigated by Victoria Police but there was insufficient evidence and no charges were brought against the father –Where Child Protection ended its engagement with the family after Victoria Police concluded its investigation into the father – Where the mother nonetheless asserts the father poses a risk to the children because he sexually abused them and because he perpetrated family violence – Where interim orders were made for the children to spend professionally supervised time with the father but time did not commence – Where finding that the children are enacting a ‘resist and refuse’ dynamic – Where finding that the father does not pose a risk to the children – Where finding that the mother is the children’s primary attachment figure and the children should remain living primarily with her – Where finding that the parties should have joint decision-making responsibility for major long-term issues, the children should live with the mother and spend time with the father graduating over time.

FAMILY LAW – Property – Urgent listing – Where judgment reserved in final property proceedings – Where the husband gave notice of his intention to sell a business forming part of the asset pool – Where the wife seeks orders permitting her lawyers to liaise with the business broker in relation to the conduct of sale and that sale proceeds be held on trust for the parties – Where the husband submits that the wife’s involvement in the sale process will ‘spook’ potential purchasers – Where the husband adduces no evidence in support of his submissions – Where the orders sought do not contemplate the wife’s direct involvement in the sale process – Orders made as sought by the wife.