Please enter your search query in the form below to search judgments of the Family Court of Australia

Number of results per page:
Austlii logo

Judgments search is powered by Austlii

Note: Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish or distribute a report of a case or part of a case, including information contained in a Judgment, which identifies parties, related or associated persons, witnesses or others involved in the case. A breach of the section is a criminal offence. The section also sets out certain limited defences to criminal liability. An example is where the Court has expressly authorised the publication.

  • Paintal & Paintal (No. 2) [2020] FamCA 1031

    08 Dec 2020

    FAMILY LAW – application to consolidate holiday time with father – orders for partial consolidation –– need to balance child’s distress and opportunity to enjoy relationship with the father – consequential orders for telephone contact

  • Perry & Wharton [2020] FamCA 998

    07 Dec 2020

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTYSale – where the wife seeks an order for the sale of a real property – where the husband has not participated in the proceedings – where the property is in the name of the company controlled by the husband – where the company was placed into liquidation and the liquidator commenced proceedings in the County Court of Victoria – where the County Court made orders declaring that the property was held on trust for the husband by the company – where the liquidator is owed his fees and has incurred legal expenses in the County Court proceedings – where the liquidator and the company have both been joined in these proceedings – where the liquidator is not opposed to the sale of the property however wants to have control of the sale – where the wife has more interest in the outcome than the liquidator – where the monies from the sale of the property will be held on trust and will satisfy any amount owed to the liquidator – where the wife is ordered to have conduct of the sale – where the wife is ordered to have sole occupation of the property to the exclusion of the husband pending sale

  • Owen & Owen (No. 3) [2020] FamCA 1022

    04 Dec 2020

    FAMILY LAW – review of Registrar’s decision to execute the document – where the wife seeks that it be set aside – where s 106A discretion should not become a Trojan horse for a de facto s 79A attack upon the orders – where it is justified that relief be granted – reasonable concession of factual matters on behalf of the wife

  • Torbeck & Stables (No. 2) [2020] FamCA 1009

    30 Nov 2020

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Best interests

    PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Just and equitable

  • Owen & Owen (No. 2) [2020] FamCA 1003

    27 Nov 2020

    FAMILY LAW – practice and procedure – review of decision by Registrar to execute document – extension of time for review

  • Varnham & Moses (No. 2) [2020] FamCA 1002

    27 Nov 2020

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Stay of orders – Where the husband seeks a further stay of final orders and an injunction restraining the wife from enforcing such orders – Where a Notice of Appeal has been filed against those orders – Where a stay was previously granted – Where the parties’ positions have changed – Where the appeal will proceed undefended by the wife – Where the husband is now employed – Where the wife has sold one property retained as a result of final orders –  Where the appeal would not be rendered nugatory if the stay was not granted – Application dismissed.

  • Chiew & Anstead [2020] FamCA 1000

    27 Nov 2020

    FAMILY LAW – DISCLOSURE – s 106B proceeding – whether disclosure can be compelled in a s 106B proceeding – allegations of fraud made by party seeking disclosure – order for disclosure refused.

  • Swift & Swift [2020] FamCA 991

    25 Nov 2020

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – interim property distribution – litigation funding – whether it is just and equitable to make adjustment – order made – spousal maintenance – where husband offers an undertaking to continue to support wife – whether the undertaking is a financial resource available to the wife – where undertaking is not regarded as a financial resource of a nature to enable the wife to adequately support herself – orders made – injunctions – restraints on dealing with the property pool – notice period – orders made – binding death nomination – where wife’s claim can be made good by other mechanisms – injunctive relief not granted – documents held by accountant – husband’s duty to disclose

  • Arkwright as Trustee for the Bankrupt Estate of Mercer & Hass [2020] FamCA 981

    24 Nov 2020

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Application for costs – Indemnity costs – Party and party costs – Agreement that applicant should pay respondent’s costs – Whether costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis – Conduct of the proceedings by the parties – Orders made for party/party costs in a fixed amount to be paid by the applicant for part of the proceedings and otherwise on an indemnity basis – Indemnity costs to be assessed by a Registrar

  • Angeli & Farina [2020] FamCA 975

    23 Nov 2020

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim parenting – Relocation – Where the parties and child relocated from the United States to Australia in 2019 – Where subsequently the parties have separated on a final basis – Where the mother seeks to relocate back to the United States with the child on an interim basis – Where the father and Independent Children’ Lawyer oppose the mother’s Application – Where the mother suffers from a depressive anxiety condition – Where both parties make allegations of the other engaging in family violence – Where the Court noted such factual dispute cannot be resolved in interim proceedings – Application dismissed

  • Yalpat & Yalpat (No. 2) [2020] FamCA 973

    19 Nov 2020

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – consent orders – live with Mother – handover arrangements – time with Father – religious observances – travel – where orders ameliorate risks of conflict between the parties – where orders increase the Father’s time with the child

  • Raynor & Raynor [2020] FamCA 951

    19 Nov 2020

    FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – joinder – equitable claims asserted by parties proposed to be joined.

  • Rainford & Rainford [2020] FamCA 945

    13 Nov 2020

    FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Property Adjustment – Where discussion of applicable principles – Relevance of wife’s prospective inheritance – Where parties concede it appropriate to make adjusting orders – Where appropriate to consider a final adjusted pool for division – Where s 75(2) factors considered – Where husband will retain prospective CGT property liabilities – Where not appropriate to further adjust contribution based findings – Where orders made that pool be divided as to 52.5 per cent to the wife and 47.5 per cent to the husband.

  • Police Commissioner of South Australia & Agustina [2020] FamCA 1010

    12 Nov 2020

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD ABDUCTION – where return of 10 year old girl sought to the United States – where child has an 8 year old sibling in state of habitual residence with the requesting parent and an infant sibling in Australia with the respondent mother.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD ABDUCTION – where respondent mother makes application for a psychiatric assessment of impact of return on the child of being separated again from the respondent mother and also from her infant sibling in context of grave risk of harm exception to mandatory return.

    FAMILY LAW – CHILD ABDUCTION – where lack of regular and effective communication, both between the sisters and between sister and respondent mother prior to child’s arrival in Australia – where important that some communication be organised and a reliable structure be put in place for communication to occur between children and parents in Australia and the United States of America.

  • Giunta & Giunta (No. 2) [2020] FamCA 1045

    09 Nov 2020

    FAMILY LAW – EVIDENCE – Admissibility – Admissibility of excerpt of transcript of audio recording – Admissibility of audio recording – Where the mother has raised an objection to a paragraph in the father’s Affidavit that was improperly obtained – Consideration of whether to admit the paragraph into evidence – Where the parties indicate that they will confer on an agreed total transcript of the recording – Where the Court indicates that it will consider a tender of the whole transcript of the recording – Paragraph not read

  • Hake & Lawford and Ors [2020] FamCA 906

    28 Oct 2020

    FAMILY LAW- PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – relationship of 17 years duration – documentary evidence of contributions poor – application undefended – no contradicting version of events given by first respondent – applicant and second plus third respondent resolving their differences – applicant proposing a division of assets on a percentage equating to 65% to the applicant and 35% to the first respondent – evidence of family violence – held, that percentage division is just and equitable – orders made as propounded by the applicant.

  • Hackett & York and Anor [2020] FamCA 939

    13 Oct 2020

    FAMILY LAW – COSTS – Between parties – where de-facto wife and third party seek a costs order in their favour as against the de-facto husband – where the de-facto husband has been wholly unsuccessful on two occasions to have a subpoena issued to the third party – order for indemnity costs made in favour of third party to be paid by de facto husband – order for fixed costs made in favour of the de-facto wife to be paid by the de facto husband

  • Rosen & Morrison [2020] FamCA 986

    12 Jun 2020

    FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Interim parenting orders – Where the parties previously abided by a parenting plan under which they exercised equal shared parental responsibility, the children lived with the mother, and spent substantial time with the father – Where the father alleges the children are exposed to the risk of harm by subjection or exposure to family violence, physical abuse and sexual abuse in the mother’s care – Where the father withheld the children from the mother – Where the mother sought to restore the regime that existed under the parenting plan – Where the father sought to reverse the regime under the parenting plan – Where the mother denied the children are at any risk in her household but agreed to an injunction restraining her from bringing the children into contact with her partner or his children – Where the risks of harm alleged by the father are capably cured by the injunction – Where the parties are equally capable of catering for the children’s needs – Ordered the children live with the mother and spend substantial time with the father – Mother restrained from allowing the children to be brought into contact with her partner or his children.