ALUN & GREGOROVIC

[2014] FamCA 1200

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

ALUN & GREGOROVIC [2014] FamCA 1200

FAMILY LAW – Transfer to Federal Circuit Court.  Application wrongly filed.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Alun

RESPONDENT: Mr Gregorovic

FILE NUMBER: MLC 9879 of 2008

DATE DELIVERED: 6 November 2014

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Cronin J

HEARING DATE: 6 November 2014

REPRESENTATION

THE APPLICANT: In person

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Ms Swann

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Rigoli Lawyers

Orders

1. That all outstanding proceedings are transferred to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

2. That the wife provide the husband’s solicitor by 11.00am on 7 November 2014, a copy of the lease relating to the property at B Street, Suburb C.

3. That the husband’s costs of this day are reserved.

4. Certify

5. That the reasons this day be transcribed.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Alun & Gregorovic has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: MLC 9879 of 2008

Ms Alun

Applicant

And

Mr Gregorovic

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. Pursuant to the protocol signed by the respective heads of the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court, it is agreed that work that should be more appropriately dealt with in those respective courts will be the focus of the court’s attention if an application is brought in the wrong court.  The application I am dealing with today is a property dispute but on either view of the parties’ respective positions, the equity that they had in what seems to be two real properties is relatively modest.  From what I have heard from counsel for the husband, there is nothing unusual about the case or of any great complexity, but it is a case that requires expedition through the more simpler processes that the Federal Circuit Court uses.

2. The wife today has appeared unrepresented.  She had filed her application that way but I am told she had legal advice up until the time that she issued the proceedings.  It appears that the proceedings were issued without any clear understanding of the correct court but, on any view, had a lawyer issued it for it the case would have almost certainly been filed in the Federal Circuit Court.  The wife has filed an affidavit along with a financial statement, and whilst some of those matters may be objectionable under the Evidence Act, the Federal Circuit Court would no doubt deal with those matters in a very simple way. 

3. It seems to me, without any real opposition from the parties, this is a case that should be more quickly dealt with in that court and for that reason I propose to transfer it.  In transferring it, I am also conscious of the fact that the parties will require a conciliation conference at some stage, but that is a matter that the Federal Circuit Court in their duty list can deal with relatively expeditiously. 

4. There was also before this Court today an application for interim orders, one of which is an exclusive occupancy order, that because of the fact that the wife was only given the documents effectively at court this morning, I proposed to give the wife an opportunity to file some material.  She has now indicated she will get some legal advice and no doubt file that material prior to the next return date, which will be advised to the parties by the Federal Circuit Court.

I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Cronin delivered on 6 November 2014.

Associate: 

Date:  22 December 2014