Judgments

FAMILY LAW – COSTS – application for costs following delivery of judgment in parenting matter – where one party largely unsuccessful – no order for costs.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the Mother alleges serious family violence by the Father – Where the evidence does not establish family violence – Where it is found that the Mother has prevented the children from having a relationship with their Father – Orders made for the children to live with the Father – Orders made for the Father to have sole parental responsibility – Orders made for a six-month moratorium period where the Mother is not to see or contact the children – Where the Mother will thereafter spend time with the children.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the husband seeks time with the children on a fortnightly basis for five nights per fortnight extending to six nights per fortnight in 2026 and for half of all school holidays – Where wife opposes the husband’s application and proposes that the children remain living with her and spend time with the husband each alternate weekend and on special occasions – Orders that parents share sole parental responsibility and joint decision making for the children save for the wife having sole parental responsibility for the medical and therapeutic issues regarding the children – Orders that the children spend time with the husband for four nights per fortnight and from Term 1 in 2026 for five nights per fortnight – Orders that children spend time with the husband during school holidays and special occasions.

PROPERTY – Where the husband argues for a 60 per cent distribution of a contentious property pool based on a 5 per cent adjustment on each of contributions and factors pursuant to s 75(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) in his favour – Where the wife opposes the husband’s application and proposes that the net property pool of the parties be divided as to 70 per cent to her and 30 per cent to the husband – Where the wife makes a Kennon claim – Where the husband fails to adduce corroborative evidence without explanation in relation to the sale of his business – Orders that there be a distribution of the net property pool inclusive of superannuation as to 65 per cent to the wife and 35 per cent to the husband – Justice and Equity.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING AND PROPERTY – Defended hearing – Final orders – Parenting – Where the children live with the mother and have spent limited daytime with the father – Where the parents live in different States – Where since interim orders were made in April 2024 neither party has applied for interim orders requiring the children to spend time with the father – Where the mother told the court child expert she considers the children are responsible for the time they spend with the father – Where the father’s deep mistrust of the mother’s willingness to support the children’s relationships with him is not objectively explicable by the evidence – Where the children all express the desire to spend more time with the father – Where the father’s insistence the children live with him implies the prioritisation of his desire over the children’s needs – Orders made – Children to remain living with the mother and that she have sole decision-making authority – Children to spend three weekends of each school term and half school holidays with the father – Property – Where it is just and equitable to make orders adjusting the parties’ property interests – Where the mother and her sibling are registered legal owners of a property purchased by the maternal grandparents – Where the mother asserts the property is the subject of a resulting trust – Where the mother was impelled to admit the presumption of advancement ousted the presumption of a resulting trust – Where loans entered into by the parties to pay for legal fees are ignored as liabilities – Contribution-based entitlement assessed as 65/35 with a 12 per cent adjustment in favour of the mother – Orders made – Where the parties’ agree for the mother to retain the former matrimonial home and other real properties, provided she pay the father a cash sum – Where the parties otherwise agree to retain their personal property and superannuation entitlements.

FAMILY LAW – INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION – Where the parents and children were habitually resident in the United Kingdom – Where the mother retained the children in Australia following a Christmas holiday – Where jurisdictional requirements under the Family Law (Child Abduction Convention) Regulations 1986 (Cth) were satisfied – Where the mother opposed return on the basis of grave risk of harm and intolerable situation – Where she alleged coercive control, family violence, financial abuse and risks arising from the father’s health – Where the mother is electing not to return to the United Kingdom – Where the grave risk exception is not established – Orders made for the return of the children to the United Kingdom

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Final parenting orders – Where the parents separated in early 2022 and the children have since lived with the maternal grandparents – Where the father pleaded guilty to assaulting the mother – Where the children witnessed acts of family violence between the parents – Where the father relocated to New Zealand in late 2022 – Where the time spent by the children with the father has been professionally supervised – Where the maternal grandparents joined the proceedings in August 2023 – Where at final hearing the residence of the children was a contest between the maternal grandparents and the father – Where the mother has been beset by an excessive use of alcohol – Where the mother acknowledged her deteriorated parenting capacity necessitates the supervision of any time the children spend with her for the foreseeable future – Where the mother, the maternal grandparents and the Independent Children’s Lawyer agree the children should live with the maternal grandparents – Where the children told the family consultant they wish to retain their residence with the maternal grandparents – Where the father’s beliefs the children will not be properly supported by the maternal grandparents are not probative – Where the maternal grandparents have the capacity to meet the children’s physical, emotional and intellectual needs – Ordered the children’s residence should remain with the maternal grandparents – Where the parties agreed conferral of parental responsibility for the children would follow the residence order – Ordered the children spend time with the father during school holidays – Ordered the children spend time with the mother once per week and on special occasions to be supervised by the maternal grandparents.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application by respondent for adjournment of hearing as to whether an agreement is enforceable as a binding financial agreement – Where the respondent’s lawyers were granted leave to withdraw – Order under the s 102NA cross-examination scheme – Failure to attend previous hearings – Failure to comply with directions – Prejudice to applicant if proceedings delayed – Effect of adjournment on other litigants awaiting court dates – Application refused.

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – Where father wishes to live with children in United Kingdom – where father has not fostered, encouraged or facilitated the relationship between the children and the mother – application dismissed. 

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Interim parenting orders – Application to reconsider recently made final parenting orders – Where the parties agree that there has been a significant change in circumstances such that it is in the children’s best interests for the final parenting orders to be reconsidered – Where each parent proposes competing orders to address alleged risk of harm to the children when in the other parent’s care – Where the children are not presently living with or spending time with the mother pursuant to the final orders – Where the s 65DAAA application is granted – Where orders are made on an interim basis for the children to live with the father and spend day time only with the mother – Where the mother is restrained from contacting the children’s medical practitioners and therapists – Orders made progressing the matter to the preparation of a Child Impact Report.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the parties require the court to settle a joint letter of instruction to be provided to the single expert – Where the parties each provide proposed letters of instruction for the court to consider – Where the joint instructions to be provided to the single expert are settled by the court and made an exhibit to the reasons for judgment – Where the settled instructions address the key issues only.

FAMILY LAW – Children – child live with mother – child spend unsupervised time with father.

FAMILY LAW – Interim hearing – children.

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim hearing – Partial property settlement – Where the husband seeks an interim partial property settlement for his living expenses – Where the wife opposes the application – Where the parties are in dispute as to the property pool – Where the wife seeks 100 per cent of the funds held in controlled monies account – consideration of the interim order is capable of reversal – Where it is not appropriate or in the interests of justice to make an interim property order.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Recovery Order – Where final parenting orders were made providing for the youngest child to live with the mother on condition the mother relocated her residence closer to the father – Where the father contends the mother has not complied with the relocation conditions – Where the mother provided the father with redacted and incomplete residential tenancy agreements – Where the mother alleged her fear of family violence by the father and refused to divulge her new address to him – Where the mother offered to secretly reveal her address to the Court – Where all evidence must be weighed and assessed having regard to the capacities of the parties to adduce and contradict it – Where the mother has failed to comply with final orders – Where the standing orders require the youngest child to live with the father – Recovery Order issued.

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Financial agreement – Where the applicant seeks to pursue property division under s 79 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”) – Where the respondent contends an agreement between the parties is a binding financial agreement under s 90C of the Act – Agreement entered into during the marriage – Agreement provided for the immediate sale of a property and division of the proceeds – Agreement does not refer to the breakdown of the marriage or maintenance – Where the agreement is not a financial agreement within the meaning of s 90C.

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – COSTS – Final orders previously made – Combination of written and verbal offers – Offers very close to final result on a percentage basis – Offers not easily compared to final result on a dollar basis – Serious questions remained until close to final hearing – Not clear that refusal of offers was unreasonable until close to final hearing – Costs awarded – Costs limited to final hearing – Costs above scale but below indemnity.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the father seeks overnight time with the child – Where it is not in dispute that the father is a heavy user of medicinal cannabis – Where the mother contends that the father is an unacceptable risk by reason of his medicinal cannabis use – Orders for the father to spend time with the child but no overnight time ordered.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Adjournments – Where an application is made to vacate trial dates – Where s 102NA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) applies – Where an adjournment is opposed by the mother and the Independent Children’s Lawyer – Where the mother is not currently spending any time with the children – Where the Family Report writer opines it is imperative that a final decision about the parenting arrangement be reached as soon as possible – Where trial dates are adjusted to allow father’s counsel further time to prepare – Where the application is dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Stay of proceedings – Where the respondent in the substantive property proceedings sought for a permanent stay of the proceedings on the basis that the applicant is allegedly in contempt of a final parenting order between the parties – Where the respondent conceded that as the property proceedings are a different cause of action to the parenting proceedings he cannot succeed in his application – Where the application is dismissed – Where the matter is listed for a defended hearing.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING - Where the three children of the marriage habitually live in the primary care of the mother – Where the father seeks primary care alleging unacceptable risk for the children in the care of the parties – Where there is no factual basis to the parties claim – Where it is found that the father unilaterally overholds the children contrary to Court orders – Where a number of Recovery Orders issued in favour of the mother – Where family reporter recommends cessation of children’s relationship with the father – Orders for substantially reduced time for the children with the father.

FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – PARENTING – Where the mother admits to contravening interim parenting orders on each of the three counts stipulated in the father’s Contravention Application – Where the mother asserts that she had a reasonable excuse for contravention – Where the mother asserts that her failure to comply with orders was necessary to protect the safety of herself and the children – Where the mother has empowered the children to decide whether they wish to spend time with the father – Where the mother has involved the children in aspects of the parental dispute and exposed the children to her negative views of the father – Where the children were refusing to spend time with the father prior to the mother’s contraventions – Orders made that contraventions proven – Where the Court finds that the mother did not have a reasonable excuse for contravening the interim parenting orders – Orders made adjourning the matter to allow the parties to adduce evidence and make additional submissions in respect of penalty and costs.

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where the Applicant wife passed away after commencing proceedings – the parties’ adult daughter was substituted as the Applicant – Where the First Respondent husband’s wife is the Second Respondent – Property interests outside of Australia – Overseas political unrest prevented valuation evidence to be produced – Where the Applicant contends several overseas properties were more likely than not paid for by the husband rather than the Second Respondent and that the husband at the very least holds an interest in the overseas and it is more likely than not that he is the true beneficial owner of them – Where the Applicant bore the onus to establish the husband’s interest in those properties and she has failed to do so – Applications for declarations against the Second Respondent dismissed – Evidence of overseas transactions and their effect on the value of company shareholdings held personally by the husband and the estate is so deficient that caution must be exercised in attributing any definitive valuation – The corporate interests constituted as a separate pool.

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where the Applicant wife passed away after commencing proceedings – the parties’ adult daughter was substituted as the Applicant – Where the First Respondent husband’s wife is the Second Respondent – Property interests outside of Australia – Overseas political unrest prevented valuation evidence to be produced – Where the Applicant contends several overseas properties were more likely than not paid for by the husband rather than the Second Respondent and that the husband at the very least holds an interest in the overseas and it is more likely than not that he is the true beneficial owner of them – Where the Applicant bore the onus to establish the husband’s interest in those properties and she has failed to do so – Applications for declarations against the Second Respondent dismissed – Evidence of overseas transactions and their effect on the value of company shareholdings held personally by the husband and the estate is so deficient that caution must be exercised in attributing any definitive valuation – The corporate interests constituted as a separate pool.

FAMILY LAW – MAJOR COMPLEX FINANCIAL PROCEEDINGS LIST – DISCOVERY – wife seeking disclosure from the second to sixth respondents – the disclosure sought was highly invasive – disclosure sought was unduly wide, imprecise, unparticularised and irrelevant – held, the application in a proceeding for discovery is dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where wife alleges serious non-disclosure and concealment of digital assets including cryptocurrency by husband – Ex parte application for search order, freezing order and order appointing a receiver of the digital assets.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Subpoenas – Objections to subpoenas – Subpoena for production of trust taxation returns and financial statements – Subpoena for credit and loan applications, correspondence, supporting documentation and bank statements in respect of mortgage secured over former matrimonial home – Objection on the basis of lack of apparent relevance, ulterior and/or improper purpose, abuse of process, oppression and/or fishing – Where both parties seek alteration of interests in property – Trusts controlled by wife’s family members – Where wife is eligible object of trusts – Where no expert evidence that wife’s right to due consideration and administration is actually capable of valuation and if so how – Where no expert evidence of what documents would be required to undertake such a valuation – Where husband does not seek to increase the pool of assets available for division by any value ascribed to the wife’s equitable choses in action – Where no apparent relevance of documents established – Where little difference whether by reason of the trusts the wife has property or financial resources for the purposes of s 79(5)(c) – Where no contributions by the husband or the wife to the trusts are alleged – Consideration of s 95 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Consideration of the proportionality of the course proposed by the husband in the circumstances of the case – Notices of Objection upheld in part – Subpoenas struck out in part.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Consolidation of two proceedings where the applicant is the father of three children - whether the father poses an unacceptable risk of psychological, emotional, and sexual harm to the children – whether the first respondent poses an unacceptable risk of harm to X –Allegations of conspiracy between the two respondents – Allegations of inappropriate discipline by the first respondent – Departmental involvement – whether long term supervision is in the best interests of the two younger children – X placed in the care of her mother with no time between the child and her father, contrary to the position of the DFFH – two younger children to live with their mother and spend no time with the father – not in the children’s best interests for long term supervision.

FAMILY LAW – MAJOR COMPLEX FINANCIAL PROCEEDINGS LIST – PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW – a property adjustment proceeding on foot in this court and a property adjustment proceeding on foot in Singapore between the same parties concerning the same subject matter – the proceeding in this court commenced earlier in time – divorce not yet granted, whether in Australia or in Singapore – consideration of the matrix of criteria to be addressed as espoused in Henry v Henry (1996) 185 CLR 571.

STAY APPLICATION – whether the Australian proceeding should be stayed.

ANTI SUIT INJUNCTION – parties agreeing that the determination of the anti-suit injunction will largely be addressed by the considerations associated with the stay application. Held, Australia is the clearly inappropriate forum – this proceeding stayed.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appointment of expert witness other than a single expert witness – Where father sought to adduce evidence from an expert witness under r 7.10 – Where mother opposed application – Consideration of factors in r 7.11 – Application dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – ADOPTION – Where the child’s biological father is deceased – Leave granted to the Applicant stepfather to make an application pursuant to the Adoption Act 2009 (Qld).

FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTIONS – where final orders made in August 2024 provide for payment to the wife and sale of properties in default of payment – where the first and second respondent were jointly and severally liable for payment – where there was default under the final property orders – where the wife sought to enliven default provisions to effect the sale of properties – where the wife sought to restrain the first and second respondent from interfering with the sale of properties pursuant to the default provision – where the first and second respondent contended that there were no grounds to support the grant of an injunction – injunctive relief granted.

FAMILY LAW – URGENT EX PARTE APPLICATION – recovery and airport watchlist order for application filed personally by the father and not by the father’s solicitors – father contending child is at risk – father’s time with the child suspended pursuant to interim orders – no grounds exist for the making of a recovery order or airport watchlist order – application dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for adjournment of final hearing – Where the parties have been involved in protracted litigation in respect of the care arrangements for their children over many years – Where the children currently live with the father and spend supervised time with the mother – Where the mother seeks the adjournment of the final hearing in circumstances where she asserts that her two treating psychiatrists are unavailable on the currently listed final hearing dates – Where the mother’s evidence suffers from several deficiencies and does not particularise any exchange that would establish the foundation for her assertion – Where the mother raises a number of alleged concerns with respect to the current care arrangements but her application is not consistent with the timely investigation and resolution of those serious contentions of risk – Application dismissed – The best interests of the children, the interests of justice and procedural fairness, and the proper use of court resources, weigh heavily against any further delay in these proceedings reaching resolution.

FAMILY LAW – INTERIM HEARING – Parenting – Where authorities in relation to the assessment of risk at an interim stage considered – Where both parents make allegations of family violence against the other – Where only limited findings can be made – Where allegations of coercive control against the Father are untested – Where the Single Expert has expressed strong but untested views as to the risk posed by the Father – Where interim orders made for the children to spend no time with the Father – Where orders made for the Mother to complete parenting courses – Where orders made for the Father to enrol in and complete a men’s behaviour change program – Where certain restraints made against the Mother only in circumstances where the Father will not be spending time with the children – Where orders made enabling the Mother to travel internationally with the children.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – RELOCATION – Application to vary/discharge in part previous parenting orders made in 2022 for the mother to have sole parental responsibility for the children, for the children to live with the mother, for one child to spend time and communicate with the father in accordance with her wishes and for the other child to spend defined time with the father – Where the mother seeks to relocate the children with her to the United Arab Emirates – Where the mother proposes that the children live with the parties’ adult daughter and their maternal uncle if not permitted to relocate with her – Where the father opposes relocation of the children but does not seek orders that they live with him in the event the mother relocates – Where the father seeks to restrain the mother herself from relocating – Where the children have not spent time with the father since 2023 – Views expressed by the children considered – Findings as to the father’s credit – Findings of family violence perpetrated by the father against the mother – Findings of neglect of the youngest child by the father while in his care – Finding of no significant change of circumstances to warrant reconsideration of order for sole parental responsibility – Finding that it is not in the children’s best interests to be separated from their mother – Order made permitting the mother to relocate the children with her – Previous orders relating to spend-time arrangements between the youngest child and the father discharged – Order for youngest child to communicate with the father once per calendar month via electronic communication.

INJUNCTIONS – Application for a mandatory injunction in relation to Islamic divorce – Application instituted in breach of s 50 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 (Cth) – Application deemed to be transferred to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) – Consideration of Gwiazda v Ber (Unreported, Family Court of Australia, 23 February 1983).

PROPERTY – Application for orders in relation to property not the subject of previous s 79 orders made in 2022 – No application pursuant to s 79A – Application not pursued – Application dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – FAMILY LAW – Application to discharge Independent Children’s Lawyer – Application dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTION –Where interlocutory orders were previously made for the wife to be sole trustee for the sale of a property – Where the husband thereafter lodged a caveat over the relevant property – Where the wife seeks orders to facilitate the sale of the property being carried out without further intervention from the husband – Injunction granted restraining the husband from lodging any further documents on the title of the said property.

FAMILY LAW – HARMFUL PROCEEDINGS – Where a harmful proceedings order was previously made directed to the husband – Where the husband seeks to pursue further interlocutory parenting and property orders – Where the husband was not given leave to pursue further orders.

FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Written submissions – Application for indemnity costs when matter has settled by consent on the first day of trial – Where the Second and Third Respondents seek costs against the Applicant – Where the Applicant’s claims are alleged to be flawed and lack merit – Consideration of s 117(2A) factors – Where the Applicant’s conduct justifies a costs order being made on an indemnity basis as assessed.

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Financial agreement – De facto relationship – Where the applicant seeks for the financial agreement to be set aside – Where the respondent contends it would be unjust and inequitable for the Court to find the agreement was not binding – Consideration of legal advice – Advice given by someone who was not a legal practitioner – No evidence of content of advice – Respondent’s claim fails – Agreement not binding.

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Application to stay no-time parenting orders pending appeal – where applicant father seeks to resume supervised time pending appeal – where applicant father seeks to prevent international relocation of children pending appeal – where respondent mother consents to stay on relocation of children pending appeal but not on international travel – where children have not spent time with father since Final Hearing – where appeal is listed for hearing within one month: international travel order stayed - stay otherwise refused.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – STAY APPLICATION – Where the husband’s delay in making the application for a stay in part rendered a stay otiose – Where it is not accepted that a failure to order a stay will render the appeal nugatory – Where a generous consideration of the grounds of appeal produces a scarcity of merit, in turn generating a compelling circumstance attracting weight against the exercise of discretion to order a stay – Where the balance of convenience favours the dismissal of the stay – The husband’s Application in a Proceeding is dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – EX TEMPORE – Application by the wife for leave to rely on three affidavits filed and served out of time but over a month before the trial commenced – Where the wife’s application was made after trial had commenced – Where leave was granted to the husband to cross-examine the wife – Where the Court is not satisfied of a persuasive reason to refuse leave to the wife – Leave granted to the wife to rely on the three affidavits subject to any specific objection.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – two interim applications brought by the respondent mother seeking various orders including an adjournment of the final hearing – final hearing adjourned – where the balance of the two applications (filed 9 July and 23 July 2025) shall be decided by the Court on the receipt of written submissions.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Assessment of risk – Parental capacity – Orders made for the child to live with the Mother and spend time with the Father – Orders made for the Mother to have sole parental responsibility.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application – Contravention – Where the applicant sought to enliven 144 counts of contravention against the fourth respondent – Where there are no extant proceedings before this court for determination – Dismissal of Application -Where the fourth respondent sought costs as against the applicant – Where the applicant opposed an order for costs due to the conduct of the fourth respondent – Costs awarded on party/party basis in favour of the fourth respondent to be paid by the applicant.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Where the parents and the Independent Children's Lawyer sought that final parenting orders be made by consent in terms contained within a signed Minute of Order provided to the court – Where the orders sought are in the child’s best interests – Where orders are made which will largely reflect the terms of the orders signed by the parents.

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where four applications are before the Court – Where three of the applications are dealt with in these Reasons – Contravention Application filed 31 March 2025 resolved by consent – Contravention Application filed 18 March 2025 dismissed – Application in a Proceeding filed 14 March 2025 dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – EX TEMPORE – Application by the husband for a stay of a dollar-for-dollar costs order made in July 2023 – Where at the time the order was made the parties expected to sell a property worth about $37,000,000 – Where the husband claims the absence of a sale is a material change in circumstances – Where the relative strength of the husband’s financial position is not as apparent as it was in July 2023 – Where the husband’s capacity to meet the order has more than likely diminished – Where the wife now has litigation funding available to her – Sufficient basis for the stay made out – Order made granting the stay pending further order.

FAMILY LAW – COSTS – wife’s application for costs –costs hearing adjourned to appoint a s102NA lawyer for the husband – costs reserved.

FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Application for final parenting orders – Where each parent seeks that the child live with them and spend substantial time with the other parent – Where the Independent Children’s Lawyer proposed that the child live with the mother – Where the child has lived with the mother since separation – Where the Court Child Expert recommended against any change of residence – Where the father lacks the insight to realise how reversal of the child’s residence could adversely influence his short and long term mental health and wellbeing – Where the parties disputed a change to the child’s name – Ordered the mother’s surname will be used as the child’s middle name – Ordered the child live with the mother – Ordered the parties retain parental responsibility – Ordered the mother have sole decision-making responsibility for all major long-term issues – Ordered the child spend regular and consistent time with the father.