Bikri & Falco - [2024] FedCFamC2F 1477

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Bikri & Falco [2024] FedCFamC2F 1477

File number(s): MLC 11230 of 2024

Judgment of: JUDGE TURNBULL

Date of judgment: 25 October 2024

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – REVIEW – PROCEDURAL – Whether the listing date should be moved forward and the time for the Respondent to file their material be shortened – Whether the decision is reviewable – Whether the matter is urgent such that it would justify the matter being given precedence over other matters before the court – Whether there is evidence of an alternative judicial officer to deal with the matter if it is brought forward.

Legislation:
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

Dyne & Dyne [2021] FedCFamC1F 96

Lombardi & Rider [2021] FedCFamC2F 57

Myers & Myers [2011] FMCAfam 1104

Division: Division 2 Family Law

Number of paragraphs: 29

Date of hearing: 14 October 2024

Place: Hobart via Microsoft Teams

Counsel for the Applicant Ms Abdallah

Solicitor for the Applicant: Bardo Lawyers

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Nguyen

Solicitor for the Respondent: Jindalee Lawyers Pty Ltd
ORDERS

MLC 11230 of 2024

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:
MR BIKRI

Applicant

AND:
MS FALCO

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE TURNBULL

DATE OF ORDER:

18 OCTOBER 2024

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.That 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 three (3) pages, addressing the relevant matters under section 117(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) and the quantum of costs with reference to the appropriate scale.
3.If the Respondent complies with Order 2, then the Applicant to the substantive proceedings must make, file and serve a response to the Respondent’s 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…

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 Bikri & Falco

Details

AGLC: Bikri & Falco [2024] FedCFamC2F 1477
Case: [2024] FedCFamC2F 1477
Decision Date: 25 October 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Mr Bikri sought a review of the procedural decision made by the court in relation to his substantive family law proceedings against Ms Falco. The primary issue before the court was whether the listing date of the substantive matter should be moved forward and the time for the respondent to file their material shortened. Additionally, the court needed to determine if the decision was reviewable, if the matter was urgent enough to warrant precedence over other cases, and if there was evidence of an alternative judicial officer to handle the matter if it was expedited.

The court examined the application for review and concluded that the decision was not reviewable as it did not meet the criteria set out in Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). The court found that there was no evidence of urgency to justify moving the listing date, nor was there evidence of an alternative judicial officer available to handle the matter sooner. Consequently, the application for review was dismissed.

As a result, the court ordered that the application for review filed on 24 September 2024 be dismissed. The court also noted that if Ms Falco wished to seek costs, she must within 14 days file and serve a summary of argument addressing the relevant matters under section 117(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) and the quantum of costs. If she complied with this requirement, Mr Bikri would then have 14 days to respond to the summary of argument, with the issue to be decided on the papers.

Orders

Orders of the court

MLC 11230 of 2024

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MR BIKRI

Applicant

AND:

MS FALCO

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE TURNBULL

DATE OF ORDER:

18 OCTOBER 2024

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. That 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 three (3) pages, addressing the relevant matters under section 117(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) and the quantum of costs with reference to the appropriate scale.

3. If the Respondent complies with Order 2, then the Applicant to the substantive proceedings must make, file and serve a response to the Respondent’s 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):	MLC 11230 of 2024
Judgment of:	JUDGE TURNBULL
Date of judgment:	25 October 2024
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – REVIEW – PROCEDURAL – Whether the listing date should be moved forward and the time for the Respondent to file their material be shortened – Whether the decision is reviewable – Whether the matter is urgent such that it would justify the matter being given precedence over other matters before the court – Whether there is evidence of an alternative judicial officer to deal with the matter if it is brought forward.
Legislation:	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 Dyne & Dyne [2021] FedCFamC1F 96 Lombardi & Rider [2021] FedCFamC2F 57 Myers & Myers [2011] FMCAfam 1104
Division:	Division 2 Family Law
Number of paragraphs:	29
Date of hearing:	14 October 2024
Place:	Hobart via Microsoft Teams
Counsel for the Applicant	Ms Abdallah
Solicitor for the Applicant:	Bardo Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr Nguyen
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Jindalee Lawyers Pty Ltd

MLC 11230 of 2024
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:	MR BIKRI Applicant
AND:	MS FALCO Respondent

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