Judgments

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

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

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 – 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 – 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 – PROPERTY – interim – sole use and occupation of former matrimonial home – whether parties prevented from making application by operation of s 114AB(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – de facto spousal maintenance – where capacity to pay maintenance not in issue – whether expenses claimed by de facto wife are reasonable – application by de facto wife for litigation funding reflecting significant disparity in the financial circumstances of the parties – application of costs power for litigation funding orders – whether payment should be characterised prior to trial

FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – Where the applicant father alleges that the respondent mother has contravened final parenting orders on five occasions between 2 February 2024 and 28 March 2024 by failing to provide the two children to spend time with him for the weekend as required – Where the respondent admits contravening the orders but contends that she has a reasonable excuse for the contraventions – Where the respondent has regularly personally supervised time for the children with the applicant throughout the period of the contravention – Whether the respondent believed on reasonable grounds that not allowing the children to spend time with the applicant unsupervised was necessary to protect the health or safety of the children – Where the court is satisfied that the respondent did believe on reasonable grounds that not allowing the children to spend time with the applicant unsupervised was necessary to protect their health and safety – Where the court is satisfied that the period during which the children and the applicant did not spend time together because of the contravention was not longer than necessary to protect the health and safety of the children – Where all Counts in the application for contravention are dismissed – 

VARIATION OF FINAL ORDERS – Whether the primary orders should be varied pursuant to s70NBA of the Act – Where both parents seek variation – Where it is found to be in the best interests of the children to suspend final orders which require the children to spend time with the applicant unsupervised – Where it is in the best interests of the children to make an order until further order that the time that the children spend with the applicant is supervised by a children’s contact service – Where the parents agree that it is in the children’s best interests to communicate with the applicant using a Messaging app – Where the respondent’s agreement is subject to the proviso that use of the Messaging app will not reveal the children’s location to the applicant – Where there is no evidence before the court about how the Messaging app operates – Order made for the children to communicate with the applicant using the Messaging app subject to the proviso sought by the respondent – Where the respondent is directed to file and serve an Initiating Application and her supporting documents by no later than 4.00 pm on 18 February 2025.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – variation of parenting orders – father in prison - potential for adverse emotional and psychological impact from excluding the father from the children’s lives

FAMILY LAW – FINANCIAL AGREEMENT – whether each of the parties each received independent legal advice as required by subsection 90UJ(1)(b) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – whether unjust or inequitable if agreement were not binding on the parties pursuant to section 90UJ(1A) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

FAMILY LAW- Parenting – where this hearing was listed originally as a 65DAAA hearing – where the applicant seeking “minor” variation to order – where the initial application regarding 65DAAA alleged a deterioration of the respondents mental health – where the respondent undertook a psychological assessment – where there was found to be no deterioration in the fathers mental health – where the applicant still seeks a “minor” variation in the orders following the psychological assessment – where the applicant wishes to relocate to another city for a job opportunity – where the applicant is seeking leave to amend her initiating application – where leave was granted – where the 65DAAA hearing is adjourned and consolidated with variation of orders hearing.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – ex tempore reasons – wife’s application for stay of final property orders – property orders made by consent at the conclusion of a final hearing of seven days – application to appeal out of time – property orders part executed in favour of wife – wife seeks stay only of orders conferring benefit on husband – court not satisfied of bona fides of application or that appeal would be rendered nugatory if stay refused – preliminary assessment of merits of appeal –  application for stay dismissed – costs reserved

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Final orders – father has a long criminal history of violent offences and breaches of court orders – multiple community corrections orders with treatment component and programs for anger management – multiple breaches of intervention orders – breaches of suspended sentences – father incarcerated for much of children lives – alcohol abuse – drug abuse – father found in 2018 judgment to be unacceptable risk to other children – father not spent time with the two children in this matter for three years – father diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder – no substantial evidence of change – no insight into his violence or offending – ongoing risk – risk not ameliorated by supervised time – no time with father – change of surname.

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – proposed consent orders did not reflect a just and equitable alteration of property interests – s 114 injunction – preservation of the property pool - procedural orders

FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application to review orders made by a Registrar – where application to review by the husband was not successful – application by the wife for indemnity costs – application for indemnity costs refused but order for costs on the scale made.

FAMILY LAW – Property – Failure to file amended response – Failure to articulate quantum of litigation funding sought – Oral application for litigation funding dismissed

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – child (aged 11) exposed to family violence between parties and subjected to family violence and problematic behaviour by mother – child has lived with father since 2022 and spent professionally supervised time with mother since February 2023 – mother claims her use of family violence and problematic behaviour is a response to family violence by the father and resultant trauma (PTSD) and her neurodivergence is misunderstood – single expert psychologist opinion mother presents with atypical personality traits posing a high risk to child’s emotional wellbeing – consideration of mother’s mental health and parenting capacity – finding mother lacks insight into and has not adequately addressed her problematic behaviour and child would be exposed to unacceptable risk of psychological and physical harm by spending unsupervised time with her – orders made for father to have sole parental responsibility, child to live with father and to spend limited, privately supervised time with the mother – mother’s communication with child to be by letters, cards and gifts only due to history of inappropriate communications

FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PROPERTY – Sale of property – payment of mortgage – spousal maintenance – applications dismissed.  FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PARENTING – Best interests of children – orders made.

FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Interlocutory application wholly unsuccessful

FAMILY LAW – Application to review decision of Senior Judicial Registrar (‘SJR’) – application dismissed – application for costs made and dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – Property – both parties seeking orders for adjustment of financial interests – de facto husband’s phoenix operation post-separation of previously jointly operated business – disputed identification of assets and liabilities – contest about add backs for parental loans, post-separation inheritance largely dispersed, reduction of business account balance – limited positive findings about add backs – allegations of incomplete or non-disclosure by de facto husband – dispute about adjustments for future needs – adjustments made for future needs and egregious conduct including non-disclosure pursuant to section 90SF(3)(r)

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Interim hearing – Best interests of child.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Serious allegations of family violence – Lack of insight by the father – Children have not spent time with father for period of almost four years – Leaving the door open for relationship with the father

FAMILY LAW - CHILDREN – Previous orders made – Third application – Child 11 years at trial – Child withheld then compliance with order – Parents not lived together since child’s birth – Co-parenting relationship – Support for other parent’s relationship – Lack of support in the past – Lack of support affecting school attendance – Risk of repetition – Sibling relationships – Risk of future disruption of parental relationship

FAMILY LAW – Child Support – Child Support Registrar unable to retrospectively consider assessment past 18 months ago – whether leave should be given to the Registrar to consider further than 18 months- balance of prejudice – explanation for delay – prima facie case – leave granted

FAMILY LAW - Costs.

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Application for property adjustment – 14 year relationship with the parties living separately under the same roof for a further 4 years post separation - Where the husband’s assertion that an inheritance received by him post separation should be excluded from the property pool available for adjustment between the parties is rejected -  Where the wife's credibility was impacted due to frequent exaggeration in both her written and oral evidence - Where a disproportionate amount of hearing time encompassed issues of homemaker and parenting contributions - Where the wife was the primary income earner and the husband was the primary carer of the children - Where both parties seek a Kennon adjustment – Where a finding made that the husband’s contributions were made discernibly more onerous by the conduct of the wife - Where the wife made greater parenting contributions upon the husband vacating the former matrimonial home in circumstances where she cares for the children twelve nights a fortnight and the husband does not pay child support-  Where the parties’ superannuation entitlements are dealt with in a separate pool of property – Finding of equal contributions to the superannuation property pool and 54% in the husband’s favour to the non-superannuation property pool - no adjustment made to the contribution findings.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Best interests of children.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Undefended hearing as against the applicant father – Repeated failure to comply with Court orders – Circumstances where father has an injury – Views of the child given significant weight due to age and maturity – Circumstances where the father has spent supervised time with the child for prolonged period

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Child has spent no time with father for six years – Lack of insight on the part of the father – Whether there is any benefit to child having a relationship with the father

FAMILY LAW – Interim defended hearing – both parents prohibited from consuming alcohol while children in his or her care – children live with mother – gradual increase of time for the father with the children – consideration for meaningful relationship for the children with both parents – further hair follicle test ordered for next year

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Circumstances where mother was overseas for prolonged period and had little contact with child – Significant change of circumstance – History of non-compliance with Court Orders by the mother – History of unilateral decision-making by the mother – Change of residence – Child’s best interests

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where maternal grandparents have cared for the children for over 2 years – Where mother has history of alcohol abuse – Where mother recently lived transient lifestyle – Where mother has no clear plans for the care of the children – Where children at risk whilst in mother’s care

FAMILY LAW – Costs – enforcement application – where some but not all orders made – costs power engaged – whether circumstances justify indemnity costs – whether conduct occurring after the enforcement application relevant to costs assessment – where costs are compensatory and not punitive – fixed costs order made

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – where 16 and 11 year old children have consistently failed to spend overnight time with their father – whether orders should be made increasing that time to week about time contrary to their views – where the father has perpetrated extensive family violence, including assaulting the children

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – where both parties seek to retain the former matrimonial home – where neither party sought a superannuation split despite the significant disparity between the value of their respective superannuation interests

FAMILY LAW – Application for review – review of judicial registrar’s orders making parenting orders by consent on a final basis – father seeks orders be set aside and made as interim orders only – whether there was agreement that the orders be final – not satisfied that there was agreement to orders being final ones – orders discharged and orders made in terms of proposed interim orders by consent signed by the father and agreed by mother’s representative

FAMILY LAW – final hearing – Aboriginal child in care of non-Aboriginal putative paternal grandparents – risks arising in relation to each of the mother and the putative father – where putative father lives with putative paternal grandparents – where child has experienced significant change in her living arrangements to date-orders for parenting arrangements.

FAMILY LAW – Application to review decision of Registrar – effect of notice of discontinuance –where Applicant filed notice of discontinuance – where no response filed – where Registrar ordered matter be set down for ‘undefended hearing’ after notice of discontinuance filed at urging of Independent Children’s Lawyer (‘ICL’) – where Court is no longer seized of the matter – where ICL has no standing to maintain the proceeding – Registrar orders of no effect – application for review upheld and proceeding discontinued.

FAMILY LAW – Property – Where the parties have property in the United Kingdom and Australia – Where the Respondent wife raised an issue of forum non conveniens – Where part of the property pool is situated in company assets – Where the Applicant husband received substantial post-separation inheritance – Where inheritance is treated as a separate pool – Where the Court makes an equal contributions finding as to the non-inheritance pool – Where s 75(2) adjustment made in favour of the wife

FAMILY LAW – COSTS – where the applicant wife was wholly unsuccessful in bringing an application for property division pursuant to s90SM – the wife’s application lacked any merit – wife’s refusal to accept reasonable offers – where indemnity costs were considered – where costs pursuant to the scale are inadequate – special costs payable 

FAMILY LAW – Interim hearing – issue of interstate relocation – where the mother now resides in Town B with the children – where the father resides in Queensland – where the father alleges the mother unilaterally relocated with the children – where the mother alleges the father was aware her intention to move – where the mother moved to Town B for a better job opportunity – where there is a real issue of the mother promoting the relationship of the father to the children – where the mother previously made monetary requests of father to see the children – where the mother changes her position during the hearing – where time with the father is to re-commence – where the children are to live with the mother in Town B until the final hearing – where a family dispute resolution conference is ordered – trial directions made.

FAMILY LAW – Opposed divorce application – whether there is an extant marriage – recognition of overseas divorce in Australia – where the parties were married in Country B – where the parties migrated to Australia – where the parties have resided in Australia until 2023 – where the respondent returned to Country B in 2023 to visit family and while there retained lawyer for a divorce application – where the respondent filed for divorce in Country B – residence or domicile or last place of cohabitation qualifications of section 104(3) not satisfied – whether common law rules of private international law of recognition of overseas divorce satisfied – whether applicant for Australian divorce “appeared” in overseas divorce proceedings – where the fact of overseas law required to be proved by admissible evidence – matter requiring expert evidence – where there was no admissible evidence – where not in the interests of justice for court to call expert evidence – apparent anomaly of overseas divorce does not activate section 44(3) time period-section 55A declaration where children not seeing one parent –  where none of section 104(3) or common law recognition of overseas divorce conditions satisfied – divorce order made

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Short form reasons – Urgent oral interim application for parenting orders – Immediate change of residence – Whether there is an unacceptable risk to the child

FAMILY LAW – REVIEW – PROCEDURAL – Whether the listing date should be moved forward and the time for the Respondent to file their material be shortened – Whether the decision is reviewable – Whether the matter is urgent such that it would justify the matter being given precedence over other matters before the court – Whether there is evidence of an alternative judicial officer to deal with the matter if it is brought forward.

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – where final orders were made in February 2024 – where the father was given sole parental responsibility – where the children were to live with the father – where the orders did not allow for the children to spend time with the mother unless otherwise agreed between the parties – where child protection were notified of risk to the children in the fathers care the same day as the final orders and reasons were handed down to the parties – where the court makes no finding on that notification to the department – where the department appeared amicus curae – where the department intervened – where there are orders made in City B children’s court – where the department did not have access to the reasons of the proceedings in this court – where the department did not give consent for orders in this court be made under section 69ZK – children court proceedings in October – parties are directed to advise chambers of future children court proceedings – fixed for a further hearing on a date to be advised.

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – application for stay of final orders pending an appeal – immediate risk to child of physical and psychological harm outweighs long term risks identified at final hearing – stay application granted.

FAMILY LAW – REVIEW – PROCEDURAL – Father seeking an urgent hearing date and that the listing on 30 October 2024 be brought forward – no alternative available date before a judicial officer detailed – Whether the matter is reviewable and, if so, has sufficient urgency to warrant it taking precedence over other matters before the court.

FAMILY LAW – REVIEW – Whether interim orders made by a Senior Judicial Registrar should be varied by changing the living arrangements of the children – Whether it is in the bests interests of the children to live with the Father and/or spend significant time with him – Whether either party poses an unacceptable risk to the children.

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim parenting orders sought – Department for Child Protection and South Australia Police reports made by the mother – mother has made historical allegations of sexual abuse against father – allegations of father hurting the child physically – ongoing investigations by South Australia Police – Independent Children’s Lawyer appointed - ex tempore reasons delivered – orders made

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – De facto relationship – non-compliance with trial directions – complete non-disclosure by respondent – failure to file or challenge evidence.