Bates & Ullman - [2024] FedCFamC2F 1478

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Bates & Ullman [2024] FedCFamC2F 1478

File number(s): CAC 1781 of 2024

Judgment of: JUDGE TURNBULL

Date of judgment: 25 October 2024

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – REVIEW – PROCEDURAL – Father seeking an urgent hearing date and that the listing on 30 October 2024 be brought forward – no alternative available date before a judicial officer detailed – Whether the matter is reviewable and, if so, has sufficient urgency to warrant it taking precedence over other matters before the court.

Legislation:
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 (Cth)

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021

Cases cited:
Bannerman & Frank [2015] FCCA 3171

Canvin & Jesney [2021] FedCFamC2F 145

Dyne & Dyne [2021] FedCFamC1F 96

Lombardi & Rider [2021] FedCFamC2F 57

Myers & Myers [2011] FMCAfam 1104

Division: Division 2 Family Law

Number of paragraphs: 27

Date of hearing: 14 October 2024

Place: Hobart

Counsel for the Applicant: Ms Maher

Solicitor for the Applicant: Foster Johnson Lawyers

Counsel for the Respondent: Ms Kuemmel

Solicitor for the Respondent: Rossi Simicic Lawyers
ORDERS

CAC 1781 of 2024

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:
MR BATES

Applicant

AND:
MS ULLMAN

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE TURNBULL

DATE OF ORDER:

18 OCTOBER 2024

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The Application for Review filed 24 September 2024 be dismissed.
2.If the Respondent to the substantive proceedings intends to make an application for costs she must, within 14 days, make, file and serve a summary of argument of no longer than 3 pages, addressing the relevant matters under section 117(2) and the quantum of costs with reference to the appropriate scale.
3.If the Respondent complies with Order 2, then the Applicant must make, file and serve a response to the summary of argument within 14 days of receiving the same - with the issue to be decided on the papers.

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.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under a pseudonym has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
JUDGE TURNBULL
Overview

These proceedings concern an Application for Review (‘Review’) filed by Mr Bates (‘the Father’) on 24 September 2024 which was later served on Ms Ullman (‘the Mother’) on…

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 Bates & Ullman

Details

AGLC: Bates & Ullman [2024] FedCFamC2F 1478
Case: [2024] FedCFamC2F 1478
Decision Date: 25 October 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Bates and Ullman, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia was presented with an application for a review by the applicant, Mr. Bates, who sought an urgent hearing date and the advancement of the substantive matter currently scheduled for 30 October 2024. The applicant argued that there were no available dates before a judicial officer before the existing listing date, thus necessitating an earlier hearing. The respondent, Ms. Ullman, opposed the application for review on the grounds that it lacked sufficient urgency to warrant such a change.

The court was required to determine whether the application for review was reviewable and, if so, whether it had sufficient urgency to warrant its advancement over other pending matters. The court examined the criteria for urgency and the principles guiding the allocation of judicial resources in the context of family law proceedings. The applicant's submissions were considered, but the court found that the application did not meet the threshold for urgency required to warrant a change in the scheduled hearing date.

Consequently, the court dismissed the application for review. The judge ordered that if Ms. Ullman intended to apply for costs, she must file a summary of argument within 14 days. Should Ms. Ullman comply, Mr. Bates would then have 14 days to respond. The court's decision was based on the lack of sufficient urgency to justify advancing the substantive hearing date, and the need to maintain the efficiency and fairness of the court's scheduling process. The form of the order is subject to formal entry into the court's records.

Orders

Orders of the court

CAC 1781 of 2024

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MR BATES

Applicant

AND:

MS ULLMAN

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE TURNBULL

DATE OF ORDER:

18 OCTOBER 2024

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The Application for Review filed 24 September 2024 be dismissed.

2. If the Respondent to the substantive proceedings intends to make an application for costs she must, within 14 days, make, file and serve a summary of argument of no longer than 3 pages, addressing the relevant matters under section 117(2) and the quantum of costs with reference to the appropriate scale.

3. If the Respondent complies with Order 2, then the Applicant must make, file and serve a response to the summary of argument within 14 days of receiving the same - with the issue to be decided on the papers.

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.

File number(s):	CAC 1781 of 2024
Judgment of:	JUDGE TURNBULL
Date of judgment:	25 October 2024
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – REVIEW – PROCEDURAL – Father seeking an urgent hearing date and that the listing on 30 October 2024 be brought forward – no alternative available date before a judicial officer detailed – Whether the matter is reviewable and, if so, has sufficient urgency to warrant it taking precedence over other matters before the court.
Legislation:	Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 (Cth) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021
Cases cited:	Bannerman & Frank [2015] FCCA 3171 Canvin & Jesney [2021] FedCFamC2F 145 Dyne & Dyne [2021] FedCFamC1F 96 Lombardi & Rider [2021] FedCFamC2F 57 Myers & Myers [2011] FMCAfam 1104
Division:	Division 2 Family Law
Number of paragraphs:	27
Date of hearing:	14 October 2024
Place:	Hobart
Counsel for the Applicant:	Ms Maher
Solicitor for the Applicant:	Foster Johnson Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondent:	Ms Kuemmel
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Rossi Simicic Lawyers

CAC 1781 of 2024
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:	MR BATES Applicant
AND:	MS ULLMAN Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	JUDGE TURNBULL
DATE OF ORDER:	18 OCTOBER 2024