Amari & Qureshi

In the matter of Amari & Qureshi, the appeal involved a dispute over final parenting orders, with the father, the appellant, arguing procedural unfairness due to the absence of an interpreter provided to him. The Family Court of Australia heard the appeal. The primary judge's decisions were challenged on the grounds of factual inaccuracies and alleged omissions in the findings. The court had to determine whether the primary judge erred in these respects and whether the appellant's right to procedural fairness was compromised. The court also had to consider an application to adduce further evidence in the appeal and a request for costs by the Independent Children’s Lawyer.

The court examined whether the appellant had been denied procedural fairness by not being provided with an interpreter. It found that while the appellant had an entitlement to such an interpreter, the primary judge's failure to provide one did not necessarily lead to a denial of procedural fairness. The court assessed the primary judge's findings and concluded that no errors of fact were made, and the omissions in findings did not affect the outcome. The appeal was dismissed on these grounds. The application to adduce further evidence was partly granted, allowing the Notice of Child Abuse filed on 21 May 2014 to be included as evidence in the appeal, while other parts of the application were dismissed as irrelevant or contentious.

The court also considered the application by the Independent Children’s Lawyer for costs against the appellant. Given that the appeal was unsuccessful, the court dismissed the application for costs. The final orders included allowing the appellant leave to adduce the Notice of Child Abuse as further evidence, dismissing other parts of the application to adduce evidence, dismissing the appeal, and dismissing the application for costs by the Independent Children’s Lawyer. These orders were subject to formal entry in the court's records.