Legal Research
Cases
BIANCHI & HOLTON

BIANCHI & HOLTON

Case [2020] FamCA 974 20 November 2020

Type to search within this case.

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BIANCHI & HOLTON

[2020] FamCA 974

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – joinder of legal personal representatives of the applicant to press the deceased’s s 90SM property adjustment application – joinder orders made.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss 44, 79, 90SM(8)
Family Law Amendment (De Facto Financial Matters and Other Measures) Act 2008 (Cth)
Family Law Rules 2004, r 6.15

Black v Black (2008) 38 Fam LR 503
Bunbury v Fuller [1853] 156 ER 47
D.M.W. v C.G.W. (1982) 151 CLR 491
Federated Engine-Drivers and Firemen’s Association of Australasia v Broken Hill Pty Co Ltd (1911) 12 CLR 398
Grassby v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 1
Hazeldell Ltd v Commonwealth (1924) 34 CLR 442
In the Marriage of Yunghanns (1999) 24 Fam LR 400
Karjala & Gallard [2020] FamCA 110
Kennon v Spry (2008) 238 CLR 366
Norton & Locke (2013) 50 Fam LR 517
Official Trustee in Bankruptcy v Nedlands Pty Ltd (in liq) (2000) 99 FCR 554
Old UGC Inc v Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales (2006) 225 CLR 274
Peacock v Newtown Marrickville and General Co-operative Building Society No 4 Ltd (1943) 67 CLR 25
Pelechowski v Registrar, Court of Appeal (NSW) (1999) 198 CLR 435
Public Service Association of South Australia Inc v Industrial Relations Commission of South Australia (2012) 249 CLR 398
R v Gray; ex parte Marsh (1985) 157 CLR 351
Re Macks; ex parte Saint (2000) 204 CLR 158
Robins v Incentive Dynamics Pty Ltd (1999) 91 FCR 423
Willocks v Anderson (1971) 124 CLR 293
Zhang v Zemin (2010) 79 NSWLR 513

Mark Leeming, Authority to Decide – The Law of Jurisdiction in Australia (Federation Press, 2012)

APPLICANT:

Mr Bianchi (deceased)

RESPONDENT:

Ms Holton

FILE NUMBER:

DGC

188

2019

DATE DELIVERED:

20 November 2020

PLACE DELIVERED:

Melbourne

PLACE HEARD:

Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF:

Wilson J

HEARING DATE:

10 November 2020

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT:

Mr D. Mort

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT:

Vic Rajah Family Lawyers

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Not applicable

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Webb Korfiatis Family Law

Orders

Pursuant to s 90SM(8) of the Family Law Act 1975 and Rule 6.15 of the Family Law Rules 2004, Mr C and Mr D are substituted for the deceased applicant Mr Bianchi in this proceeding.
This proceeding is referred to the docketed registrar for ongoing case management and allocation to a judicial docket.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

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

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules

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 BIANCHI & HOLTON

Details

AGLC: BIANCHI & HOLTON [2020] FamCA 974
Case: [2020] FamCA 974
Decision Date: 20 November 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Bianchi & Holton*, the proceeding concerned an application for property settlement. The applicant, Mr Bianchi, had died during the course of the proceedings. The court was required to determine whether Mr Bianchi's legal personal representatives, Mr C and Mr D, should be substituted for him as the applicant in the proceeding.

The central legal issue before the court was the application of s 90SM(8) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) and Rule 6.15 of the *Family Law Rules 2004* (Cth) to permit the substitution of the deceased applicant's legal personal representatives. This involved considering whether the proceeding could continue in the absence of the original applicant and the appropriate mechanism for its continuation.

The court ordered that Mr C and Mr D be substituted for the deceased applicant, Mr Bianchi, pursuant to s 90SM(8) of the *Family Law Act 1975* and Rule 6.15 of the *Family Law Rules 2004*. The proceeding was then referred to the docketed registrar for ongoing case management and allocation to a judicial docket.

Orders

Orders of the court

Pursuant to s 90SM(8) of the Family Law Act 1975 and Rule 6.15 of the Family Law Rules 2004, Mr C and Mr D are substituted for the deceased applicant Mr Bianchi in this proceeding.

This proceeding is referred to the docketed registrar for ongoing case management and allocation to a judicial docket.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

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.

Actions

Citations

BIANCHI & HOLTON [2020] FamCA 974

Cases Citing This Decision

No citing cases yet.

Cases Cited

Karjala & Gallard [2020] FamCA 110
Citation 1 (Para 2)

…rate the existence of its jurisdiction. In Karjala & Gallard[1] I wrote about the matter. It is utile to repeat here what I held in that case – [1] [2020] FamCA 110. 74.It is well settled that every court, superior or otherwise, undoubtedly possesses implied jurisdiction upon the principle that a grant of power car…
Black v Black [2013] NSWSC 954
Citation 2

…Black v Black (2008) 38 Fam LR 503 Bunbury v Fuller [1853] 156 ER 47 D.M.W. v C.G.W. (1982) 151 CLR 491 Federated Engine-Drivers and Firemen’s Association of Australasia v Broken Hill Pty Co Ltd (1911) 12 CLR 398 Grassby v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 1 Hazeldell Ltd v Commonwealth (1924) 34 CLR 442 In the Marriage of Yung…
Public Service Association of South Australia Inc v Industrial Relations Commission of South Australia [2012] HCA 25
Citation 3

…Marrickville and General Co-operative Building Society No 4 Ltd (1943) 67 CLR 25 Pelechowski v Registrar, Court of Appeal (NSW) (1999) 198 CLR 435 Public Service Association of South Australia Inc v Industrial Relations Commission of South Australia (2012) 249 CLR 398 R v Gray; ex parte Marsh (1985) 157 CLR 351 Re Macks; ex parte Saint (2000) 204 CLR 158 Robins v Incentive Dynamics Pty Ltd (1999) 91 FCR 4…
Zhang v Zemin [2011] HCATrans 134
Citation 4 (Para 2)

…deration Press, 2012) paragraph 2.5. [5] (1924) 34 CLR 442. [6] (1911) 12 CLR 398. [7] (2006) 225 CLR 274. [8] (1999) 91 FCR 423. [9] (2010) 79 NSWLR 513. [10] (2000) 99 FCR 554. [11] [1853] 156 ER 47. [12] (1982) 151 CLR 491. [13] (1985) 157 CLR 351. [14] (2000) 204 CLR 158. [15] (2008) 238 CLR 366. [16] (2012) 249 C…
Zhang v Zemin [2010] NSWCA 255
Citation 5

…57 CLR 351 Re Macks; ex parte Saint (2000) 204 CLR 158 Robins v Incentive Dynamics Pty Ltd (1999) 91 FCR 423 Willocks v Anderson (1971) 124 CLR 293 Zhang v Zemin (2010) 79 NSWLR 513 Mark Leeming, Authority to Decide – The Law of Jurisdiction in Australia (Federation Press, 2012)…
Kennon v Spry [2008] HCA 56
Citation 6

…1989) 168 CLR 1 Hazeldell Ltd v Commonwealth (1924) 34 CLR 442 In the Marriage of Yunghanns (1999) 24 Fam LR 400 Karjala & Gallard [2020] FamCA 110 Kennon v Spry (2008) 238 CLR 366 Norton & Locke (2013) 50 Fam LR 517 Official Trustee in Bankruptcy v Nedlands Pty Ltd (in liq) (2000) 99 FCR 554 Old UGC Inc v Industrial R…
Old UGC Inc v Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales [2006] HCA 24
Citation 7

…0 Kennon v Spry (2008) 238 CLR 366 Norton & Locke (2013) 50 Fam LR 517 Official Trustee in Bankruptcy v Nedlands Pty Ltd (in liq) (2000) 99 FCR 554 Old UGC Inc v Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales (2006) 225 CLR 274 Peacock v Newtown Marrickville and General Co-operative Building Society No 4 Ltd (1943) 67 CLR 25 Pelechowski v Registrar, Court of Appeal…
Re Macks; Ex parte Saint [2000] HCA 62
Citation 8 (Para 2)

…R 423. [9] (2010) 79 NSWLR 513. [10] (2000) 99 FCR 554. [11] [1853] 156 ER 47. [12] (1982) 151 CLR 491. [13] (1985) 157 CLR 351. [14] (2000) 204 CLR 158. [15] (2008) 238 CLR 366. [16] (2012) 249 CLR 398. [17] (1943) 67 CLR 25. [18] (1971) 124 CLR 293. [19] (1999) 24 Fam LR 400. [20] (2008) 38 Fam LR 503. [21] (2013)…
Official Trustee in Bankruptcy v Nedlands Pty Ltd (in liq) [2000] FCA 599
Citation 9 (Para 2)

…graph 2.5. [5] (1924) 34 CLR 442. [6] (1911) 12 CLR 398. [7] (2006) 225 CLR 274. [8] (1999) 91 FCR 423. [9] (2010) 79 NSWLR 513. [10] (2000) 99 FCR 554. [11] [1853] 156 ER 47. [12] (1982) 151 CLR 491. [13] (1985) 157 CLR 351. [14] (2000) 204 CLR 158. [15] (2008) 238 CLR 366. [16] (2012) 249 CLR 398. [17] (1943) 67 C…
Robins v Incentive Dynamics Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 1651
Citation 10

…Relations Commission of South Australia (2012) 249 CLR 398 R v Gray; ex parte Marsh (1985) 157 CLR 351 Re Macks; ex parte Saint (2000) 204 CLR 158 Robins v Incentive Dynamics Pty Ltd (1999) 91 FCR 423 Willocks v Anderson (1971) 124 CLR 293 Zhang v Zemin (2010) 79 NSWLR 513 Mark Leeming, Authority to Decide – The Law of Jurisdiction in Aust…
R v Gray; Ex parte Marsh [1985] HCA 67
Citation 11 (Para 2)

…CLR 274. [8] (1999) 91 FCR 423. [9] (2010) 79 NSWLR 513. [10] (2000) 99 FCR 554. [11] [1853] 156 ER 47. [12] (1982) 151 CLR 491. [13] (1985) 157 CLR 351. [14] (2000) 204 CLR 158. [15] (2008) 238 CLR 366. [16] (2012) 249 CLR 398. [17] (1943) 67 CLR 25. [18] (1971) 124 CLR 293. [19] (1999) 24 Fam LR 400. [20] (2008) 38…
DMW v CGW [1982] HCA 73
Citation 12 (Para 2)

…CLR 398. [7] (2006) 225 CLR 274. [8] (1999) 91 FCR 423. [9] (2010) 79 NSWLR 513. [10] (2000) 99 FCR 554. [11] [1853] 156 ER 47. [12] (1982) 151 CLR 491. [13] (1985) 157 CLR 351. [14] (2000) 204 CLR 158. [15] (2008) 238 CLR 366. [16] (2012) 249 CLR 398. [17] (1943) 67 CLR 25. [18] (1971) 124 CLR 293. [19] (1999) 24 F…
Willocks v Anderson [1971] HCA 28
Citation 13

…R 398 R v Gray; ex parte Marsh (1985) 157 CLR 351 Re Macks; ex parte Saint (2000) 204 CLR 158 Robins v Incentive Dynamics Pty Ltd (1999) 91 FCR 423 Willocks v Anderson (1971) 124 CLR 293 Zhang v Zemin (2010) 79 NSWLR 513 Mark Leeming, Authority to Decide – The Law of Jurisdiction in Australia (Federation Press, 2012)…
Peacock v Newtown Marrickville and General Co-operative Building Society No 4 Ltd [1943] HCA 13
Citation 14 (Para 2)

…47. [12] (1982) 151 CLR 491. [13] (1985) 157 CLR 351. [14] (2000) 204 CLR 158. [15] (2008) 238 CLR 366. [16] (2012) 249 CLR 398. [17] (1943) 67 CLR 25. [18] (1971) 124 CLR 293. [19] (1999) 24 Fam LR 400. [20] (2008) 38 Fam LR 503. [21] (2013) 50 Fam LR 517.…
Hazeldell Ltd v Commonwealth [1924] HCA 36
Citation 15

…1 Federated Engine-Drivers and Firemen’s Association of Australasia v Broken Hill Pty Co Ltd (1911) 12 CLR 398 Grassby v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 1 Hazeldell Ltd v Commonwealth (1924) 34 CLR 442 In the Marriage of Yunghanns (1999) 24 Fam LR 400 Karjala & Gallard [2020] FamCA 110 Kennon v Spry (2008) 238 CLR 366 Norton & Locke (2013)…
Federated Engine-Drivers and Firemen's Association of Australasia v Broken Hill Pty Co Ltd [1911] HCA 31
Citation 16 (Para 2)

…eeming, Authority to Decide – The Law of Jurisdiction in Australia (Federation Press, 2012) paragraph 2.5. [5] (1924) 34 CLR 442. [6] (1911) 12 CLR 398. [7] (2006) 225 CLR 274. [8] (1999) 91 FCR 423. [9] (2010) 79 NSWLR 513. [10] (2000) 99 FCR 554. [11] [1853] 156 ER 47. [12] (1982) 151 CLR 491. [13] (1985) 157 CLR…
Grassby v the Queen [1989] HCA 45
Citation 17

…47 D.M.W. v C.G.W. (1982) 151 CLR 491 Federated Engine-Drivers and Firemen’s Association of Australasia v Broken Hill Pty Co Ltd (1911) 12 CLR 398 Grassby v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 1 Hazeldell Ltd v Commonwealth (1924) 34 CLR 442 In the Marriage of Yunghanns (1999) 24 Fam LR 400 Karjala & Gallard [2020] FamCA 110 Kennon v…
[1853] 156 ER 47 [1853] 156 ER 47
Citation 18 (Para 2)

…CLR 442. [6] (1911) 12 CLR 398. [7] (2006) 225 CLR 274. [8] (1999) 91 FCR 423. [9] (2010) 79 NSWLR 513. [10] (2000) 99 FCR 554. [11] [1853] 156 ER 47. [12] (1982) 151 CLR 491. [13] (1985) 157 CLR 351. [14] (2000) 204 CLR 158. [15] (2008) 238 CLR 366. [16] (2012) 249 CLR 398. [17] (1943) 67 CLR 25. [18] (1971) 124…

Legislation Cited

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) 44, 79, 90SM(8)
4 mentions (from Para 1)
Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) 6.15
2 mentions (from Para 1)