Bletch and Douglas

[2008] FamCA 45

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BLETCH & DOUGLAS [2008] FamCA 45

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Leave to issue subpoena

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Mr Bletch

RESPONDENT: Ms Douglas

INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Legal Aid Commission NSW

FILE NUMBER: SYF 2318 of 2003

DATE DELIVERED: 5 February 2008

PLACE DELIVERED: Sydney

PLACE HEARD: In chambers

JUDGMENT OF: Moore J

HEARING DATE: 5 February 2008

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Paltos & Co

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Beazley Singleton Lawyers

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: Legal Aid Commission NSW

Orders

1. Liberty is given to the solicitors for the husband to issue subpoena in accordance with their letter of request dated 4 February 2008, to be returnable no later than Wednesday 13 February, provided the subpoena are issued and served no later than 4pm 6 February.

1. The solicitors for the husband are to notify forthwith all other parties of the subpoena issued and their return date. 

IT IS NOTED IN CONNECTION WITH THESE ORDERS that the judgment of the Honourable Justice Moore delivered this day will for all publication and reporting purposes be referred to as Bletch & Douglas.

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY

FILE NUMBER: SYF 2318  of 2003

Mr Bletch

Applicant

And

Ms Douglas

Respondent

REASONS

1. The hearing of this matter is scheduled to commence Wednesday of next week at Parramatta before Le Poer Trench J who has made case management directions to ready the matter for trial. 

2. In his Honour’s absence, the matter has been referred to me today to consider whether leave should be granted to solicitors for the father to issue 5 subpoenas to have documents brought to court for the hearing.  The application comes in the form of a letter dated 4 February from those solicitors directed to his Honour’s Associate setting out the various intended recipients and a description of the documents sought.  It is not apparent whether there is any opposition from the other parties involved or notice to them of the request. 

3. Nonetheless the matter can be dealt with in chambers without the delay and expense of having it mentioned in court.  I say that because it is apparent that directions made by his Honour on 18 December [paragraph D] dealt with the topic by giving liberty to each of the mother and father to apply through their solicitors to his Honour for the issue of any subpoena by email identifying the recipient and giving a brief description of the category of documents sought.  By paragraph I any request was to be made no later than 12 noon 4 February. 

4. The requesting letter is dated 4 February.  That it has not been addressed until now is no fault of the father’s solicitors.  Leave will be granted but it will be necessary for service to be effected expeditiously and the solicitors will be obliged to notify the other parties of their issue. 

I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Moore

Associate: 

Date:  5 February 2008