FAMILY LAW – Property – Application to reopen matter after conclusion of final hearing – Application to adduce further evidence – Where judgment remains reserved – Where respondent claimed no interest in estate of recently deceased parent at final hearing – Where applicant claims respondent stands to inherit significant sum from deceased parent’s estate – Submission that matter can be dealt with via written submissions – Where serious allegations of misleading the court in final hearing warrant further hearing – Matter listed for further half-day of final hearing.

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Consideration of s 65DAAA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where final parenting orders were made in May and December 2022 – Where the Applicant father seeks to reopen the proceedings – Where the Respondent mother seeks to dismiss the father’s application – Where the parental conflict has impacted the children’s access to therapeutic and medical assistance – Where the parents have demonstrated no joint decision-making capacity in respect of the children as required by the final parenting orders – Where the Court is satisfied that there has been a significant change in circumstances since the final parenting orders were made – Where the Court is satisfied that it is in the best interests of the children to reconsider the final parenting orders

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Relocation – Where the applicant mother seeks an order which permits her to relocate the child from Region B in New South Wales to Region C in Queensland – Where the respondent father opposes relocation of the child on the basis that it will adversely impact the child’s relationships with the father and extended paternal and extended maternal family members in New South Wales – Where the father seeks an order that the child live with each parent in an equal time arrangement – Where the mother intends to relocate to Queensland with or without the child to live with her husband– Where the mother’s wellbeing is most likely to be enhanced by the financial and practical support she will gain by living with her husband in Region C – Where the child has a meaningful relationship with both parents – Where the child has an important relationship with his maternal half-sibling – Where the child’s relationship with the mother might be diminished from feelings of rejection if the mother relocates without him and his healthy development may be impacted – Where the mother’s parenting capacity will be enriched by moving to Region C and the child will benefit – Where the child will continue to have the benefit of a meaningful relationship with the father if the mother is permitted to relocate the child – Relocation permitted – Spend time with arrangements – Discrete issues

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – interlocutory – application for leave to commence proceedings for property adjustment out of time – consideration of respondent’s jurisdictional objection – consideration of prima facie case for relief – whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient likelihood of success – where claim is not trifling – consideration of hardship – exercise of discretion – consideration of delay – consideration of prejudice to the respondent – leave granted

FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – PARENTING – Final orders made by consent in March 2021 – Three children aged 15, 13 and 11 years – Where the father originally alleged numerous counts of contravention of the final consent orders by the mother – By the final date of trial, 17 alleged counts of contravention remaining – Where all remaining contraventions were admitted by the mother but with reasonable excuse – Where the mother was legally represented for the first tranche of Trial and was self-represented on the final day of Trial – Two further counts dismissed – 15 counts established without reasonable excuse – Legal fees incurred grossly disproportionate to the issues in dispute – No sanctions imposed – Orders altered.

FAMILY LAW – LEGAL PRACTITIONERS – Where the wife seeks orders restraining the husband’s solicitors from continuing to act for him – Where there was inadvertent disclosure to the husband’s solicitors of confidential and privileged communication between the wife and her solicitors – Where the husband’s solicitors failed to provide disclosure to the wife’s solicitors of the inadvertent disclosure – Where the husband’s solicitors failed to comply with rule 31 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules 2015 (NSW)

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim proceedings – Where the mother ceased the father’s time with the children – Whether the father poses an unacceptable risk to the children – What time the children should spend with the father – Allegations of family violence – Impact on the children of parental conflict

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Whether the children should spend time with the father – Allegations of family violence, including coercive and controlling family violence – Exposure of the children to family violence – Drug use – Where the father made concessions as to falsifying negative drug test results – Where the father made concessions as to falsifying evidence in criminal proceedings – Where the father made concessions as to falsifying medical records – Where the father made concessions as to falsifying financial records – Alcohol use – Where findings are made that the father poses an unacceptable risk of harm to the children and the mother as a result of family violence – Where findings are made that the father’s drug use poses an unacceptable risk of harm to the children – Where findings are made that an order for no time is not in the children’s best interests – Where orders are made for ongoing supervised time between the father and the children, with such time to be supervised by a professional supervised contact service

FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Where the matter was listed for interim hearing in September 2023 in relation to the mother’s Application for the father’s solicitors at that time to be restrained from acting for the father – Where the mother’s Application for restraint was based on inadvertent disclosure to the father’s solicitors of confidential and privileged communication between the mother and her solicitors – Where findings were made that the father’s solicitors failed to provide disclosure to the mother’s solicitors of the inadvertent disclosure, and failed to comply with rule 31 of the Legal Profession Uniform Law Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules 2015 (NSW) – Where the mother seeks orders as to her costs in seeking that the father’s former solicitors be restrained from acting – No order as to costs made against the father’s former solicitors – Order made for the father to pay the costs of the mother on an indemnity basis in relation to the mother’s Application for restraint – Costs to be paid as agreed or assessed

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Whether the Court should refer the papers to the New South Wales Director of Public Prosecutions – Where findings were made at final hearing that the father fraudulently amended hospital records for use in criminal proceedings in the Local Court – Where both parties seek the referral not be made – Referral made

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING - application for an injunction under s 68B restraining the removal of the child from the Commonwealth of Australia - concern expressed for the welfare of the child - child has dual passports for both Country B and Australia – Country B is a Hague Convention Country – Court not satisfied that there is a real risk -Court declines to grant an injunction.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – children (aged 12 and 16) do not wish to spend time with father – acknowledged family violence by father – mother facilitated children spending time with him on an intermittent basis and not at all for extended periods – mother made major long-term decisions without consulting with father, including moving to a suburb some distance away and changing the children’s schools – children have now spent extended professionally supervised time and then unsupervised time with the father – mother does not contend children would be unsafe in father’s care – father found to have capacity to meet children’s needs, including emotional needs – mother found to lack capacity to support children’s relationship with the father, where she sees no benefit to them spending time with him – children’s expressed views incongruent with their interactions with father – finding children will benefit from relationship with father and paternal family – orders for parties to have joint decision-making responsibility – children to spend regular unsupervised time with father, arranged by agreement in consultation with the children and in default of agreement at fixed times – ancillary orders made as agreed or as determined in the children’s best interests

FAMILY LAW – CONTEMPT – Where the Applicant alleges 13 grounds of contempt by the Respondent – Where no prima facie case is found in relation to any of the grounds – Where the parties are invited to provide written submissions as to the Respondent’s application that the Applicant be prohibited from instituting further proceedings without leave pursuant to section 102QB(2)(b) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where both children are adults at the date of hearing

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Vexatious Proceedings Order – Where the Applicant sought an order pursuant to section 102QB(2)(b) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) prohibiting the Respondent from instituting further proceedings without leave – Where the proceedings have a long history – Application granted

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – Final hearing to determine discrete issue of where one child is to attend for the remainder of primary school – Where father seeks additional changes to final orders – Where father is unrepresented – Orders sought in father’s filed response to mother’s application treated as section 65DAAA application – Section 65DAAA issue adjourned for hearing at a later date to allow for procedural fairness to mother – Final orders as to child’s schooling – Circumstances where significant commute for mother to take child to current school – impacts on mother’s mental health – Where mother’s housing situation is precarious – Where mother has care of parties’ children as well as an infant from another relationship – father better able to cope with child not allegedly attending school of his choice – real risk for child either way – Change of school ordered

FAMILY LAW – PROCEDURE – leave granted to the applicant to use the Family Report filed in these parenting proceedings for criminal proceedings

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Just and equitable orders made.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Final hearing – Three children aged almost 15, 12 and 10 years –  Where the applicant is the maternal grandmother and the first respondent is the mother – Where the second respondent father has not engaged in the proceedings to date – Where the applicant maternal grandmother seeks time spending with the children – Applicant maternal grandmother alleges the children are at risk in the first respondent mother’s care – Where the first respondent mother opposes the application – Views of the children – Consideration of best interests – Where the Court considers that time spending with the applicant maternal grandmother is not in the best interests of the children – Orders for cards and gifts.

FAMILY LAW – Interim parenting arrangement - recommendation in family report for the child to spend overnight time with the father -  child has not progressed to spending overnight time with the father - ongoing mental health engagement by the father – promote the safety of the child  - co-sleeping is not in the best interests of the developmental, psychological and emotional needs of the child - best interest of the child to advance to overnight time with the father

FAMILY LAW – Final Parenting Orders made by consent – Father re-commenced proceedings less than two years later – s 65DAAA hearing – Father withdrew his application upon concluding his cross-examination – Mother seeks costs – whether to order indemnity costs – special costs order made – Mother seeks prohibition order pursuant to s 106QAC – Harmful proceedings order granted

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – where the Father withdrew his parenting application after the Mother obtained an anti-suit injunction in Country B – where the Mother prosecuted her parenting application – where no objection to the Court exercising jurisdiction was taken – where orders sought by the Mother were supported by the Independent Children’s Lawyer – where the Mother made a harmful proceedings order application

 FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Ex Parte – injunction restraining removal of the children from the Commonwealth of Australia – Airport Watchlist

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – trial vacated – parties unrepresented – whether section 102NA(2) order should be made – section 102NA(c)(iv) invoked – section 102NA(2) orders made – related parties restrained from personally cross examining each other – further trial directions made – airport watchlist order remain in place.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the Court has ordered that the parties each attend the final hearing in person – Application for father to give evidence remotely – Where the father lives in Country B – Consideration of r 15.16 and r 15.17 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) – Where the father failed to file his application for leave to appear electronically within 28 days of the final hearing – Where the Court required the father to make appropriate inquiries to determine the attitude of the foreign country’s government to the taking of evidence by electronic communication and there is no evidence of the father having done so – Application in a Proceeding for the father to remotely give evidence dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – Third application in aid of enforcement of final property orders – where orders require sale of property – where first respondent retains original paper Certificate of Title and has failed to produce it – where sale cannot proceed without the Certificate of Title – where applicant seeks cancellation of current Certificate of Title and creation of new electronic Certificate of Title – no engagement by the first respondent – orders and declarations of interest made – order for payment by first respondent of indemnity costs

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – Application by Paternal Aunt – Undefended hearing – Father has passed away and the biological mother is unknown – Respondent Surrogate does not wish to participate

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – Where one party seeks leave on first day of trial to rely on a therapist’s report – Where therapist’s report had not been filed on affidavit – Where parties had not previously identified dispute over admissibility of report – Where one party claims report is confidential – Where the affidavit and report be deemed admissible

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – where the husband is in default of his obligations to file material and make full and frank disclosure – where the husband failed to appear at the final hearing – where final Orders made as sought by the wife

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Financial Agreement – where the wife seeks a declaration that a s90C Financial Agreement is not binding – Where the husband opposes such relief –Where it is found that the wife did not receive the advice prescribed by s90G(1)(b) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ––Where the husband has not established that it would be unjust and inequitable if the Financial Agreement were not binding - Declaration made that the Financial Agreement is not binding - Where submissions are sought as to why the husband’s conceded conduct in forging the signature of both the wife and a retired barrister on a prior Application for Divorce of the parties should not be referred to the Department of Public Prosecutions for investigation and possible prosecution. 

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – agreed by consent except for restraint concerning third party- restraint imposed- no order as to costs of ICL.

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – whether the child lives with the mother or father – 13 year old child with entrenched negative views of the father largely influenced by the mother – balancing of risks of harm – consideration of 60CC factors prior to amendment of Family Law Act – child to remain living with mother – child to spend time with father in accordance with her wishes

FAMILY LAW - Leave to review out of time orders made by consent considered - alternate application under s 79A considered

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – interim schooling application – all schools more than prima facie satisfactory and otherwise capable of meeting the children’s needs – parents intentions for the children’s education – children’s expectations – impact on children of a change of school – best interests of children met by remaining at current school

FAMILY LAW – REVIEW – interim parenting – where orders for equal time varied with the Father only permitted to spend supervised time with the children – where the children are expressing views to live or spend substantial time with the Father – whether the Father poses an unacceptable risk to the children as opined by the Single Expert – where the Single Expert applies a risk assessment tool and concludes that the father poses a serious threat to the Mother and the children - whether the children should live with the Father or spend substantial unsupervised time with him - where a cautious and conservative approach to be adopted

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – final orders – child live with mother – mother have sole decision making relating to health and education – father spend each alternate Saturday with child – further time between father and child including overnight time as agreed between parties – where the father changes his position during proceedings – father to enrol in a parenting program 

FAMILY LAW – PROCEDURE- dispensing with the need to comply with the Notice to Produce under r 1.31 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim hearing – partial property settlement – spousal maintenance – sale of property – orders made, inter alia, for partial property settlement and spousal maintenance.

FAMILY LAW –  recovery order arising from after hours service – subsequent attempt to comply with order for return of child made before recovery order – subsequent order that recovery order “lie in the registry” – subsequent advise child returned – recovery order vacated

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the subject child is 7 years of age – Where the child has spent supervised time with the father for a period of two years – Where both parties have unilaterally taken the child overseas post separation - Where there are significant allegations of family violence perpetrated against the mother and the child by the father –Where the mother seeks orders that the child spend no time with the father - Where the father alleges that the mother’s partner has sexually abused the child – Where despite the father’s allegations of sexual abuse perpetrated by the mother’s new partner he seeks that the child live with the parties on an equal shared care arrangement – Where the Father alleges the mother has fabricated allegations to alienate the child from him - Where the father relies on the mother allowing unsupervised time between him and the child post separation as the basis of the orders sought by him – Findings made that the father perpetrated family violence including coercive and controlling behaviours upon the mother and the child – Finding made that the father cannot positively support a relationship between the child and the mother – Finding that the parties’ parenting relationship is reflective of a dynamic arising from the father’s controlling family violence - Finding that the family violence perpetrated by the father is a contradiction to an order for equal shared parental responsibility - Finding that the culmination of risks posed by the father cannot be sufficiently ameliorated by supervision or otherwise – Orders made that the child spend no time with the father.  

FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – Costs – Parenting – Where it was alleged the father contravened by overholding the child following periods of time spending – Where the father admitted the breaches at the commencement of Trial but maintained he had a reasonable excuse – Where after giving evidence at Trial, the father plead guilty to each count without reasonable excuse – Father to enter into a Bond – Orders for costs. 

FAMILY LAW – Harman and/or implied obligation – are special circumstances required the documents in another court – whether special circumstances in this application – very late application – whether costs should be ordered – special circumstances found – applicant released from implied obligation

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – interim application after matter not reached – stood over till final hearing date

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – two male children aged 11 and 9 – second round of parenting proceedings – where the parties consented to final orders in December 2018 – where the parties had difficulty implementing the final orders – where the parties’ communication was unproductive – where the two boys where being dragged into the conflict by both parents – where the relationship between the father and the children began to break down in part due to disclosures of physical abuse in the father’s care by the children – where the children became resistant to spending time and communicating with the father – where the children are now estranged from the father and fearful of him – where the Court considers there would be an emotional or psychological risk to the children if they were required to spend time with the father – best interests of the children.

MIGRATION – Judicial review – Administrative Appeals Tribunal (as it then was) – whether the Tribunal erred in finding that there was a ground of cancellation under s 116(1AA) – whether the Tribunal failed to give proper, genuine and realistic consideration to the risk of harm to the applicants if returned to home country – whether the Tribunal failed to consider the best interests of the applicants’ Australian citizen children and the harm they would face if returned to Sri Lanka – Court finds no jurisdictional error made by the Tribunal – Application dismissed 

MIGRATION – protection visa – decision of the Administrative Review Tribunal – failure to appear before the Tribunal – where Tribunal dismissed the application pursuant to s 99 of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth) – whether the applicant was afforded sufficient time to prepare materials – whether the Tribunal failed to consider the applicant’s grounds – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – judicial review – Protection (Class XA) (subclass 866) visa – whether the Tribunal lawfully exercised its powers under s 106(1) of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth) to make its decision on the documents without holding a hearing where it determined the matter on a different dispositive issue to that of the delegate – what is required for a valid request for the purposes of s 106(3)(b)(ii) – meaning of the phrase “it appears to the Tribunal that the issues for determination in the proceeding can be adequately determined in the absence of the parties to the proceeding” – whether or not the preconditions in s 106(3) are met is a question of jurisdictional fact which is subject to judicial review by the courts – no jurisdictional error disclosed – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION – application for judicial review – application for Protection (Class XA) (Subclass 866) visa –applicant in immigration detention – extension of time application – extension of time granted –– whether Administrative Review Tribunal erred by applying unreasonable reasoning – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed. 

MIGRATION- protection visa – application for judicial review of decision of Administrative Review Tribunal –  whether Tribunal complied with procedural fairness obligations in s 55 of the ART Act – whether Tribunal complied with s 106(3) of the ART Act in making a decision without a hearing where the applicant requested –  what is meant by issues for determination - whether issues could be adequately determined - whether decision legally unreasonable – where new dispositive issues raised - whether failure to consider evidence – whether failure to consider integers –  application dismissed.

MIGRATION – Whether Immigration Assessment Authority erred by failing to have regard to additional information – whether factual findings made without evidence – challenges to factual findings. 

MIGRATION - Application for judicial review – Student (Subclass 500) visa – Non-appearance by applicant - Application dismissed pursuant to rr 5.08(c), 5.10(a), 22.04(1)(a)(i) of the Rules.