Abud & Abud

[2010] FamCA 1132

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

ABUD & ABUD [2010] FamCA 1132

FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – Children – Penalty

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

Childers & Leslie [2008] FamCAFC 5
Gaunt (1978) FLC 90-468
L & P (unreported June 1998, Burr J)
In theMarriage of Lutzke (1979) 5 FamLR 553
McClintock & Levier [2009] FamCAFC 62

APPLICANT: Ms Abud

RESPONDENT: Mr Abud

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER

FILE NUMBER: MLC 9424 of 2007

DATE DELIVERED: 15 November 2010

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Cronin J

HEARING DATE: 15 November 2010

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr James

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Oakfair Lawyers

THE RESPONDENT: In person

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT

CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Mr Finn, Marshalls & Dent

Orders

1. That the contravention application of the wife filed 23 September 2010 is adjourned to 9.00am on Monday 15 November 2011 for judgment.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Abud & Abud is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: MLC 9424 of 2007

MS ABUD

Applicant

And

MR ABUD

Respondent

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. On 9 November 2010, I adjourned proceedings brought by Ms Abud against her former husband, Mr Abud, until today.  Those proceedings relate to contraventions of court orders.  For the purposes of these reasons, I propose to refer to Ms Abud as “the wife” and Mr Abud as “the husband,” notwithstanding they are no longer husband and wife.  I do so for convenience.

2. I adjourned the application of the wife on the basis that I wanted to consider the evidence of both parties, which had been given on 9 November 2010, but also to determine what action I should take in terms of orders if I found the contravention against the husband proved.  Each party had the opportunity on 9 November to address the issue of what should happen if I found the application proved.  I do find the contravention proved.  I say that in respect of both of the two allegations alleged.

3. Before determining what to do with this case, it is important to note that I gave the husband a number of days to consider his position, particularly having regard to the urging of counsel for the wife.  This morning, the husband has told me that he could not afford to have a lawyer here today, but I did indicate to him that I wanted to know whether he had had legal advice, and he said that he had.

4. This contravention application is the culmination of a history of litigation for two children, which is extremely sad.  I have little confidence that these proceedings will bring an end to that litigation.  The husband is a man aged 33 years who describes himself as unemployed.  He was born in Lebanon.  The wife is currently aged 25 years and was born in Australia.  The parties married in 2004 in Melbourne and separated on 25 December 2005.  It…