FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Archer & Starling (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC2F 288
File number(s): CAC 288 of 2020 Judgment of: JUDGE MANSFIELD Date of judgment: 7 March 2025 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where final orders and ancillary orders for real property abroad to be sold have not been complied with – Where an Application in a Proceeding was brought to give effect to the final orders – Where multiple unmeritorious applications then brought by the respondent – Respondent’s applications dismissed – Harmful proceedings order made – Costs orders made as to liability but not as to quantum Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) Pts VIII, XIB, XIVB, ss 79A, 80, 102QA, 102QAC, 102QAG, 114, 114Q, 117
Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth)
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) rr 1.31, 2.19, 5.05, 12.13, 12.17, 12.28, 12.47, Schedules 1, 3
Cases cited: Aitken & Aitken (No 8) [2025] FedCFamC1F 49
Ascot Investments Pty Ltd v Harper (1981) 148 CLR 337; [1981] HCA 1
Bray & Bray (1988) FLC 91-968; [1988] FamCA 22
Fazil & Fazil [2024] FedCFamC1A 54
Goldsmith & Stinson (No 2) (2023) FLC 94-134; [2023] FedCFamC1A 25
Harvey v Phillips (1956) 95 CLR 235; [1956] HCA 27
Kohan & Kohan (1993) FLC 92-340; [1992] FamCA 116
Langford & Coleman (1993) FLC 92-346; [1992] FamCA 68
Latoudis v Casey (1990) 170 CLR 534; [1990] HCA 59
Marriage of Ravasini (1983) FLC 91–312; [1982] FamCA 62
Molier & Van Wyk (1980) FLC 90–911; [1980] FamCA 85
Nagel & Clay [2021] FamCA 358
Northern Territory v Sangare (2019) 265 CLR 164; [2019] HCA 25
Pera & Pera (2008) FLC 93–372; [2008] FamCAFC 87
Roydon & Roydon [2024] FedCFamC1A 105
Division: Division 2 Family Law Number of paragraphs: 116 Date of hearing: 23 January 2025 Place: Canberra Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Hogg Solicitor for the Applicant: Orman Solicitors For the Respondent: The Respondent appeared in person ORDERS
CAC 288 of 2020 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN: MS ARCHER
Applicant
AND: MR STARLING
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE MANSFIELD
DATE OF ORDER:
7 MARCH 2025
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The husband's Response of 23 May 2024 is dismissed.
2.The husband's Application in a Proceeding of 29 October 2024 is dismissed.
3.The husband's Application in a Proceeding of 22 November 2024 is dismissed.
4.The husband's Application in a Proceeding of 10 January 2025 (sealed on 13 January 2025) is dismissed.
5.The husband's Application in a Proceeding of 21 January 2025 is dismissed.
6.From the husband's share of the proceeds of sale of the property, the wife is to be paid $8,772.00 being 50 per cent of the rent received and retained by him in relation to the property.
7.From the husband's share of the proceeds of sale of the property, the wife is to be paid $4,691.00 being the expenses incurred by her to C Law Firm.
8.From the husband's share of…
Continue reading Archer & Starling (No 2)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Archer & Starling (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC2F 288
- Case
- [2025] FedCFamC2F 288
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was tasked with determining whether Mr Starling's multiple applications were justified and whether they warranted dismissal. Additionally, the court had to decide on the appropriate financial orders concerning the proceeds of sale and whether a harmful proceedings order was warranted under section 102QAG of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). The court also considered whether costs should be awarded to Ms Archer and whether the application of proceeds of sale should be varied.
The court dismissed all of Mr Starling's applications, finding them to be unmeritorious and an abuse of process. It held that Mr Starling had engaged in harmful proceedings by repeatedly bringing applications that lacked merit. The court granted Ms Archer payments from Mr Starling's share of the net proceeds of sale, including amounts for rent, legal fees, and expenses. Furthermore, the court prohibited Mr Starling from initiating further proceedings without leave of the court and ordered him to pay Ms Archer's costs of the proceedings, subject to a subsequent application. The final orders also included variations to the application of proceeds of sale, ensuring clarity and compliance with the court's prior directives.
Orders
Orders of the court
CAC 288 of 2020
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:
MS ARCHER
Applicant
AND:
MR STARLING
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE MANSFIELD
DATE OF ORDER:
7 MARCH 2025
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The husband's Response of 23 May 2024 is dismissed.
2. The husband's Application in a Proceeding of 29 October 2024 is dismissed.
3. The husband's Application in a Proceeding of 22 November 2024 is dismissed.
4. The husband's Application in a Proceeding of 10 January 2025 (sealed on 13 January 2025) is dismissed.
5. The husband's Application in a Proceeding of 21 January 2025 is dismissed.
6. From the husband's share of the proceeds of sale of the property, the wife is to be paid $8,772.00 being 50 per cent of the rent received and retained by him in relation to the property.
7. From the husband's share of the proceeds of sale of the property, the wife is to be paid $4,691.00 being the expenses incurred by her to C Law Firm.
8. From the husband's share of the proceeds of sale of the property, the wife is to be paid $2,682.08 being 50 per cent of expenses incurred by her towards the property.
9. Harmful proceedings order - The husband is prohibited from instituting proceedings under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) against the wife without the leave of the court under s 102QAG of the Act.
10. The wife is at liberty to bring an Application in a Proceeding seeking an order or orders that the husband pay her costs of these proceedings, or part of these proceedings, in which the reasons for judgment dated 7 March 2025 and the findings therein may be referred to and relied upon.
11. Order 3 made on 16 December 2022, which provided for the application of proceeds of sale of the property, is varied such that all of the amounts that have been ordered to be paid to the wife by the husband (including Order 4 made on 16 December 2022) are to be paid from the husband's share of the net proceeds otherwise provided for in the final orders.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.