Legal Research
Cases
Ak v v [No 2]

Ak v v [No 2]

Case [2021] WASCA 74 19 April 2021

Interlocutory Nature of Parenting Orders

Causation

Family Law

Type to search within this case.

JURISDICTION     :   SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
TITLE OF COURT :   THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
CITATION:   AK -v- V [No 2] [2021] WASCA 74
CORAM:   MITCHELL JA
VAUGHAN JA

HEARD:   19 APRIL 2021
DELIVERED          :   19 APRIL 2021
PUBLISHED           :   29 APRIL 2021
FILE NO/S:   CACV 23 of 2019
BETWEEN:   AK
Appellant
AND
V
Respondent

FILE NO/S: CACV 2 of 2021
BETWEEN: AK
Appellant
AND
V
Respondent

FILE NO/S: CACV 9 of 2021
BETWEEN: AK
Appellant
AND
V
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction              :   FAMILY COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram:   O'BRIEN J
Citation: [V] and [AK] [2019] FCWA 10
File Number            :   PTW 4789 of 2010
Jurisdiction              :   FAMILY COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram:   CRISFORD J
Citation: [V] v [AK] [2016] FCWA 57
File Number            :   PTW 4789 of 2010
Jurisdiction              :   FAMILY COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram:   O'BRIEN J
Citation: [AK] and [V] [2021] FCWA 10
File Number            :   PTW 4789 of 2010

Catchwords:

Appeal - Practice and procedure - Whether extension of time in which to appeal should be granted - Whether extension of time for compliance with a springing order requiring the filing of an appellant's case should be granted after appeal dismissed by operation of springing order - Whether appeal should be dismissed on the basis that none of the grounds of appeal have any reasonable prospect of succeeding - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Family Court Act 1997 (WA), s 70A, s 70B, s 202L(3)(b), s 237(1) - (3)

Result:

CACV 23 of 2019

Application for an extension of time to comply with springing order dismissed

CACV 2 of 2021

Application for an extension of time in which to appeal dismissed
Appeal dismissed

CACV 9 of 2021

Appeal dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

CACV 23 of 2019

Counsel:

Appellant	:	R Lethbridge SC and C Andrews
Respondent	:	S Penglis SC

Solicitors:

Appellant	:	Elite Family Law
Respondent	:	Fletcher Law

CACV 2 of 2021

Counsel:

Appellant	:	R Lethbridge SC and C Andrews
Respondent	:	S Penglis SC

Solicitors:

Appellant	:	Elite Family Law
Respondent	:	Fletcher Law

CACV 9 of 2021

Counsel:

Appellant	:	R Lethbridge SC and C Andrews
Respondent	:	S Penglis SC

Solicitors:

Appellant	:	Elite Family Law
Respondent	:	Fletcher Law

Case(s) referred to in decision(s):

A v C [No 2] [2015] WASCA 199
AK v V [2021] WASCA 31
British American Tobacco Australia Services Ltd v Laurie [2011] HCA 2; (2011) 242 CLR 283
CDW v LVE [2015] WASCA 247 (S)
CDW v LVE [2015] WASCA 247; (2015) 54 Fam LR 297
Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy [2000] HCA 63; (2000) 205 CLR 337
Johnson v Johnson [2000] HCA 48; (2000) 201 CLR 488
Livesey v NSW Bar Association (1983) 151 CLR 288
MIB v JAP [2019] WASCA 175 (S)
Simonsen v Legge [2010] WASCA 238
Smits v Roach [2006] HCA 36; (2006) 227 CLR 423
T v S [2015] WASCA 225
Willoughby v Clayton Utz [2007] WASCA 5

REASONS OF THE…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Ak v v [No 2]

Details

AGLC: Ak v v [No 2] [2021] WASCA 74
Case: [2021] WASCA 74
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Court of Appeal of Western Australia considered appeals filed by a mother against several parenting orders made in the Family Court of Western Australia in relation to her child. The mother filed multiple appeals in the Court of Appeal, including appeals against the Family Court's orders made in 2016, 2019 and 2021. The mother also sought extensions of time to comply with springing orders requiring her to file an appellant's case in relation to certain of the Family Court orders. The Court of Appeal dismissed all of the appeals and applications for extensions of time, finding that none of the grounds of appeal had any reasonable prospect of success. The Court of Appeal also made orders for the mother to pay the father's costs in relation to the appeals and applications for extensions of time.

Orders