BLUM & BLUM - [2019] FCCA 3346

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BLUM & BLUM

[2019] FCCA 3346

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Spousal maintenance – where Applicant has need – where Respondent has capacity.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss.72, 74, 75
Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 69, 75

Cases cited:

In the Marriage of Mee & Ferguson (1986) 84 FLR 179
In the Marriage of Redman (1987) 11 Fam LR 411
In the Marriage of Gyselman (1991) 103 FLR 156
In the Marriage of Bevan (1993) 120 FLR 283
In the Marriage of DJM & JLM (1998) 23 Fam LR 396
Maroney & Maroney [2009] FamCAFC 45
Hall & Hall (2016) 257 CLR 490

Applicant:

MS BLUM

Respondent:

MR BLUM

File Number:

SYC 2319 of 2019

Judgment of:

Judge Morley

Hearing date:

12 June 2019

Date of Last Submission:

24 June 2019

Delivered at:

Sydney

Delivered on:

21 November 2019

REPRESENTATION

Solicitors for the Applicant:

Mr O'Sullivan of O'Sullivan Legal

Counsel for the Respondent:

Mr Dura

Solicitors for the Respondent:

Barry Nilsson Lawyers

ORDERS

PENDING FURTHER ORDER, THE COURT ORDERS:

That the Husband pay to the Wife the sum of $5,027.00 per month as spousal maintenance, the first such payment being payable by the Husband on 22 November 2019 into a bank account nominated for that purpose by the Wife to the Husband in writing, and thereafter payable monthly on the 22nd of each month until a final payment pursuant to this order on 22 March 2021.
That the Husband pay to the Wife lump sum spousal maintenance of $35,189.00 (being seven payments of $5,027.00 for the months of April to October 2019 inclusive), such payment to be made by the Husband into a bank account nominated for that purpose by the Wife in writing to the Husband by a payment of $10,054.00 by no later than 31 January 2020, a payment of $10,054.00 by no later than 30 April 2020, a payment of $10,054.00 by no later than 31 July 2020, and a payment of $5,027.00 by no later than 31 October 2020.
That each party’s application for the costs of the interim proceedings are reserved to the final Hearing.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Blum & Blum is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYC 2319 of 2019

MS BLUM

Applicant

And

MR BLUM

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

On 12 June 2019 I conducted an interim Hearing on the issue of spousal maintenance between Ms Blum as Applicant Wife (“the Wife”) and Ms Blum as Respondent Husband (“the Husband”). I apologise to the parties for my delay in making Orders and delivery of my reasons.
In her Initiating Application the Wife sought an interim order that the Husband pay her $5,055 per month spousal maintenance until and including March 2021 or such further time as the Court orders, payments to commence from March 2019, the backdated amounts to be paid by the Husband to…

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 BLUM & BLUM

Details

AGLC: Blum and Blum [2019] FCCA 3346
Case: [2019] FCCA 3346
Decision Date: 21 November 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Blum & Blum*, heard before Judge Morley, the applicant wife sought spousal maintenance from the respondent husband. The core of the dispute revolved around the wife's demonstrated need for financial support and the husband's capacity to provide it.

The court was required to determine whether spousal maintenance should be ordered, and if so, the quantum and duration of such payments. This involved assessing the financial circumstances of both parties, including their respective incomes, assets, and liabilities, to ascertain the extent of the wife's need and the husband's capacity to meet that need.

Judge Morley found that the wife had established a need for spousal maintenance and that the husband possessed the capacity to pay. Consequently, the court ordered the husband to pay the wife $5,027.00 per month by way of interim spousal maintenance, commencing on 22 November 2019 and continuing until 22 March 2021. Additionally, a lump sum payment of $35,189.00 was ordered to cover arrears from April to October 2019, to be paid in instalments by 31 October 2020. The costs of the interim proceedings were reserved to the final hearing.

Orders

Orders of the court

PENDING FURTHER ORDER, THE COURT ORDERS:

That the Husband pay to the Wife the sum of $5,027.00 per month as spousal maintenance, the first such payment being payable by the Husband on 22 November 2019 into a bank account nominated for that purpose by the Wife to the Husband in writing, and thereafter payable monthly on the 22nd of each month until a final payment pursuant to this order on 22 March 2021.

That the Husband pay to the Wife lump sum spousal maintenance of $35,189.00 (being seven payments of $5,027.00 for the months of April to October 2019 inclusive), such payment to be made by the Husband into a bank account nominated for that purpose by the Wife in writing to the Husband by a payment of $10,054.00 by no later than 31 January 2020, a payment of $10,054.00 by no later than 30 April 2020, a payment of $10,054.00 by no later than 31 July 2020, and a payment of $5,027.00 by no later than 31 October 2020.

That each party’s application for the costs of the interim proceedings are reserved to the final Hearing.

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.