Please select a judgment type from the filter below to view relevant judgments. On the AustLii website you can access previous judgments types FCoA (Appeals) judgments, FCoA First instance judgments, and FCC judgments.

Division 2 - Family law

Judgment published date:

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – supervised time – alternate weekends

Judgment published date:

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Adjustment of property interests pursuant to s79 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)  – Where there are substantial issues as to the nature and composition of the property with the wife contending the husband has a legal interest in an overseas financial enterprise operating a business – Where the material and case presented by each of the parties was contradictory and confusing and did little to assist in the finding of facts - Where the wife contends that the husband made her contributions more onerous arising from the principles enunciated in Kennon v Kennon (1997) FLC 92-757 – Where the wife’s contention is not established - Where the husband made superior financial contributions - Where the husband’s failure to provide a full and frank disclosure makes it difficult to ascertain his true financial position- Where a ten percent adjustment is made to the contribution findings in the wife’s favour as a result of the husband’s disclosure failures - Where the husband was granted legal representation funded by the Commonwealth Family Violence and Cross-Examination of Parties Scheme despite living overseas and the husband concedes he did not advise of this when making his application – Where a copy of this judgement will be provided to the Legal Aid Commission and liberty granted to make such application as the Commission sees fit.

Judgment published date:

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – Application for recovery order – Child under a NSW Children’s Court order – Child welfare officer of State of NSW consent in writing to orders – Where orders were made for return of child by father several days prior – Child not returned pursuant to earlier orders – Recovery order made.

Judgment published date:

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – Urgent interim hearing – Whether a recovery order can be made for child governed by a very old children’s court order – Longstanding arrangement – Conflict between teenager and ‘live with’ parent – Child not attending school – Child now living with previous ‘spend time’ parent – Child to live with long term ‘live with’ parent – Matter adjourned pending advice from NSW Child Protection.

Judgment published date:

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 

Judgment published date:

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)

Judgment published date:

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

Judgment published date:

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

Judgment published date:

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.  

Judgment published date:

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. 

Judgment published date:

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

Judgment published date:

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

Judgment published 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.

Division 2 - General federal law

Judgment published date:

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. 

Judgment published date:

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 

Judgment published date:

INDUSTRIAL LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application to strike out evidence of communications and documents made or prepared in connection with an attempt to negotiate a settlement of the dispute – whether any exceptions apply – whether the evidence and documents are admissible – application allowed – orders made striking the material out – orders made prohibiting inspection of the evidence and documents by any non-party.

INDUSTRIAL LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for security for costs – application of s 570 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) -  whether the applicant’s unreasonable act or omission caused the other party to incur the costs – where the applicant is self-represented – application dismissed

Judgment published date:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the applicant failed to appear at a listing before the Court relating to his judicial review application – application dismissed pursuant to r 22.04(1)(a)(i) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2025 (Cth). 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant protection visa - where Tribunal exercised discretion to proceed in the applicant’s absence under s 426(1A)(a) and not under s 426(1A)(b) - no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.  

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant student visas – whether Tribunal ignored relevant material – whether failure by the Tribunal to disclose the existence of the s 376 certificate was material - no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.   

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant protection visa – whether the Tribunal was unreasonable, illogical or irrational in determining applicant’s application under s 426A(1A)(a) - without considering alternative powers to dismiss application in s 426A(1A)(b) - no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.  

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Partner (Temporary) (Class UK) (Subclass 820) visa - Application for judicial review – Whether Tribunal made jurisdictional error in dismissing review application after non-appearance - Whether applicant consented to waive hearing appearance - Application dismissed. 

Judgment published date:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Fair Work Act -Adverse Action claim - Application for an extension of time to commence proceeding – Self-represented litigant - Application not opposed - Extension of time granted. 

Judgment published date:

CONSUMER PROTECTION – RECOVERY ACTION FOR MOTOR VEHICLE – Applicant seeks a declaration and orders for recovery of a vehicle under the Personal Property Securities Act 2009 (Cth) in respect of which it loaned moneys to the first respondent– Where the respondents each have not engaged in the proceedings – Finding that the Applicant is entitled to recovery of the vehicle under s.123 of the Personal Property Securities Act 2009 (Cth) – Declarations and orders made for recovery. 

Judgment published date:

INDUSTRIAL LAW – Alleged underpayments – finding that the applicant was underpaid certain entitlements – identity of employer – finding of accessorial liability – penalties to be determined.

Judgment published date:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Pleadings – application to file amended statement of claim – application to join additional respondents. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Cancellation of protection visa - Where the Applicant was granted a protection visa in 2011 – Where in 2020 the Minister gave the Applicant a notice of an intention to consider cancellation of the visa because he had not complied with s.101(b) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) because he had given incorrect information on his visa application – Where in his response to the Notice the Applicant conceded that he had given incorrect information – Where the Minister exercised the discretion to cancel the visa under s. 109 and the Tribunal confirmed the Minister’s cancellation decision – Whether the Tribunal failed to consider a claim that the Applicant feared harm because he was of Kurdish ethnicity and because if he returned to Iran he would do so as a failed asylum seeker – Whether the Tribunal put the Applicant on notice of the issues on review - Whether the Tribunal’s finding was unreasonable in the legal sense – Application dismissed. 

Judgment published date:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Duties of competence and compliance are not suspended simply because subject matter of litigation is migration – where applicant became represented 6 days before final hearing and solicitor sent correspondence to Court directing Court to adjourn

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION LAW – Extension of time application - applicant filed 249 days out of time – insufficient explanation as to delay – Tribunal’s found that the review application was filed out of time and it had no jurisdiction – reasonable prospects of success not established – extension of time not warranted – costs ordered  

Judgment published date:

BANKRUPTCY – Ex Tempore – bankrupt failed to file a statement of affairs – trustee application under s 146 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) – pseudolegal argument - where the applicant alleges assents to legislation and appointments by the sovereign are invalid – application granted 

Judgment published date:

INDUSTRIAL LAW – review of a decision of a Registrar – hearing de novo – small claims jurisdiction – underpayment claim – casual cleaner over a six year period – agreed rates of pay and award rates of pay – calculation of underpayment – identification of the employer – jurisdiction not invoked – orders set aside

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Protection (Class XA)(subclass 866) – judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – procedural fairness – adequacy of interpretation – failure to call witness to give evidence – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed.  

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Immigration Assessment Authority – Safe Haven Enterprise Visa – whether the Authority failed to take into account the outcome of its assessment under s.473DD(b)(i) of the Migration Act 1958 (“the Act”) in its assessment under s.473DD(a) of the Act - whether the Authority’s assessment under s.473DD(a) of the Act was irrational or illogical – whether the Authority asked the wrong question under s.473DD(a) of the Act – whether the Authority’s finding that the applicant was not a spy for the LTTE, but that he merely undertook observational tasks, was irrational. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Judicial Review – Where Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) affirmed the decision not to grant applicant a student visa as it found the applicant was not a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student as required under cl 500.212 – Whether Tribunal failed to consider the applicant’s circumstances – Whether Tribunal complied with procedural fairness obligations - Direction No. 108 considered – application dismissed. 

Judgment published date:

BANKRUPTCY – review of registrar’s decision – dispute arose between the applicant and the respondent concerning a Final Fee Notice – where applicant does not seek to prosecute creditor’s petition – circumstances where there is evidence that there are no other Creditors of the respondent – creditors petition dismissed – sequestration order set aside.  

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Judicial Review – whether the Tribunal erred in determining that the applicant was not a genuine temporary entrant – where the Tribunal referred to Ministerial Direction No. 69 instead of Ministerial Direction No. 108 – where this error was not material and did not amount to jurisdictional error – application dismissed.  

Judgment published date:

COSTS – section 570 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – whether late amendment of pleadings constitutes an unreasonable act – relevant considerations.  

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Judicial Review – Where Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) affirmed the decision not to grant applicants student visas as it found the applicant did not satisfy PIC 4020 – application dismissed 

Judgment published date:

COSTS – section 570 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – whether late amendment of pleadings constitutes an unreasonable act – relevant considerations.  

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – judicial review – decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal refusing to grant student visa – whether Tribunal misconstrued direction made under s 499 of Act and thereby failed to comply with direction – whether Tribunal excluded capacity of factor in direction to weigh in favour of applicant – application dismissed  

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION LAW – ex tempore reasons –  application for interlocutory injunction to restrain the Minister from removing the applicant from Australia – prima facie case not established – balance of convenience not in favour of Applicant – Application dismissed with costs   

Judgment published date:

INDUSTRIAL LAW – contravention of s 716(5) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – liability conceded – consent to penalties proposed – whether the penalties and other orders proposed by the parties are appropriate – proposed orders made 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – protection visa – judicial review of decision of Immigration Assessment Authority to refuse visa – where new DFAT country information published before Authority’s decision – whether Authority bound by Ministerial Direction no. 56 to consider most recent country information – whether unreasonable not to consider new information – whether Authority failed to properly assess whether documents were credible personal information – whether Authority failed to consider whether exceptional circumstances existed – whether Authority misunderstood or misinterpreted the law – whether logically probative basis existed for finding document was fabricated – jurisdictional error found – matter to be remitted 

Judgment published date:

FAIR WORK – Assessment of civil pecuniary penalty for contravention of s 716(5) of the Fair Work Act by failing to comply with a compliance notice given to it by the Fair Work Ombudsman – where second respondent knowingly involved in contravention – no corrective action or contrition – no antecedent conduct 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Application for Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal (“Tribunal”) decision – Allegation that the Tribunal’s decision was affected by jurisdictional error – Allegation that the Tribunal erred in determining that the applicant was not a genuine temporary entrant – Allegation that the Tribunal’s decision lacked clarity – Application dismissed. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Decision of Administrative Appeals Tribunal to refuse student visa – bias – failure to consider evidence – failure to intellectually engage - procedural fairness 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION LAW – Where the applicant failed to place evidence in support of his claims before the Tribunal when it was his obligation to do so – where the applicant’s Grounds of Review lacked particularity and were meaningless – where the applicant was in default of Court orders at the time of the hearing before the Court – no jurisdictional error established – application dismissed. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Application for judicial review– Matter listed for a final hearing – No appearance by or on behalf of the applicant – Application dismissed for non-appearance –Order for costs. 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Application for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal (“Tribunal”) decision – Allegation that the Tribunal’s decision was affected by jurisdictional error – Where the applicant alleges that the Tribunal did not place significant weight on certain key facts – Where the applicant was found not to be a genuine temporary entrant – Application dismissed 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Application for a Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – Review of Administrative Appeals Tribunal (“Tribunal”) decision – Allegation that the Tribunal’s decision was affected by jurisdictional error – Where the application was found not to be a genuine temporary entrant – Application dismissed 

Judgment published date:

MIGRATION – Safe haven enterprise (subclass 790) visa – judicial review – decision of the former Immigration Assessment Authority (IAA) – where IAA affirmed decision of delegate of the first respondent refusing the applicant a visa – whether IAA’s decision attended by jurisdictional error – IAA’s decision not attended by jurisdictional error – application for judicial review dismissed