BOZIC & HSIUNG

[2009] FamCA 869

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BOZIC & HSIUNG [2009] FamCA 869

FAMILY LAW – MARRIAGE – Nullity – Stolen identity

Marriage Act 1961 (Cth)
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Bozic

RESPONDENT: Mr Hsiung

FILE NUMBER: PAC 2254 of 2009

DATE DELIVERED: 27 July 2009

PLACE DELIVERED: Parramatta

PLACE HEARD: Parramatta

JUDGMENT OF: Johnston JR

HEARING DATE: 27 July 2009

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Mezzanotte of A B Mezzanotte Lawyers

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: No appearance by or on behalf of the respondent

Orders

IT IS NOTED:

A.That the Court finds that the applicant was ordinarily resident at the relevant time.

B.That the Court is satisfied that the ground for a nullity of the purported marriage has been established.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. That by decree the marriage purported to have been solemnized on … June 1989 between Ms Bozic and Mr Hsiung is declared to be absolutely null and void.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT PARRAMATTA

FILE NUMBER: PAC 2254 of 2009

MS BOZIC

Applicant

And

MR HSIUNG

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application for a decree of nullity in respect of a marriage which the applicant, Ms Bozic, says has never occurred.  The respondent to the proceedings is a person by the name of Mr Hsiung. 

2. The applicant says she has never met Mr Hsiung and had no knowledge of this alleged marriage until approximately January 2007 when she went to the Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages in Sydney in order to obtain evidence to the effect that she had never previously been married.

3. This is for the reason that she is currently engaged to be married to Mr H to whom she has been engaged since 2005.  The applicant said that both she and Mr H are both of the Orthodox religion.  In order to be married in accordance with the auspices of their religion, they need to be able to show evidence that they have never been married before.  The applicant said that that was the purpose of going to the Births Deaths and Marriages Registry. 

4. The applicant said that upon her being shown a copy of this alleged marriage certificate she was in shock and stated to the officers that it was impossible because she had never been married.  She then approached her solicitor and has obviously been advised to come and make this application for a decree of nullity.

5. The applicant also said that before she went to see her solicitor, she went back to the Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages in order to be able to obtain a copy of the marriage certificate.  She said that in 1989 she used to have her birth certificate in her purse but misplaced it at that time.  So she thinks that somebody has simply stolen her identity, presumably used that document in order to be able to undertake those things which it would be necessary to undertake to have a marriage registered and this is what has occurred.  The Certificate of Marriage purports to record a marriage between the applicant and a Mr Hsiung at a Sydney location on … June 1989 solemnized by Celebrant Ms A.

6. I should add that the applicant also said that she does not have any knowledge of either of the persons who purported to have put their signatures on the document as witnesses. 

7. In these circumstances, in my view, none of the requirements for a valid marriage are present, because there has not been any proper consent to the marriage.  In my view, therefore, the marriage is void and it is appropriate for this Court to grant a decree of nullity of the marriage.

8. I also propose to refer those documents to the Attorney-General's Department for consideration about whether the appropriate authorities might wish to take some further action in respect of the matter.

I certify that the preceding eight (8) paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of Judicial Registrar W P Johnston.

Associate:     

Date:              14 September 2009