Chatwin & Chatwin

[2023] FedCFamC2F 1442

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

(DIVISION 2)

Chatwin & Chatwin [2023] FedCFamC2F 1442  

File number(s):

MLC 8505 of 2023

Judgment of:

JUDGE MYERS

Date of judgment:

9 November 2023

Catchwords:

FAMILY LAW – Property Proceedings.

FAMILY LAW – LEGAL PRACTITIONER/ LAW FIRM – restraint on representing a party – conflict of interest.  

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 90C, 90K(1)(b), (e),

Legal Profession Uniform Law Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules 2015 rr 2.1-2.2, 4.1, 27.1-27.2

Cases cited:

Charisteas v Charisteas [2022] FedCFamC1A 160, [37]

Kallinicos & Hunt [2005] NSWSC 1181

Mitchell v Burrell [2008] NSWSC 772

Mumbin v Northern Territory of Australia (No 1) [2020] FCA 475

Division:

Division 2 Family Law

Number of paragraphs:

36

Date of last submission/s:

3 November 2023

Date of hearing:

3 November 2023

Counsel for the Applicant:

Ms Swann

Solicitor for the Applicant:

Kenna Teasdale Lawyers

Counsel for the Respondent:

Mr McCormick

Solicitor for the Respondent:

C Lawyers

ORDERS

MLC 8505 of 2023

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MR CHATWIN

Applicant

AND:

MS CHATWIN
Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	JUDGE MYERS
DATE OF ORDER:	9 NOVEMBER 2023

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Mr B and C Lawyers Pty Ltd trading as C Lawyers be and are hereby restrained from representing the Applicant (Wife) in these proceedings.

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).

Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish 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 s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

JUDGE MYERS:

1. This is an early interlocutory decision in the matter of Chatwin.

2. The substantive proceedings are those between the Applicant Wife (“the Wife”) and Respondent Husband (the “Husband”) where the Wife seeks to enforce the provisions of a Financial Agreement entered into between the parties on 10 December 2013 pursuant to section 90C of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (‘the Act’). The Respondent Husband seeks the agreement be set aside.

3. The parties commenced cohabitation in 2007 and married in 2009. They separated in 2013 after the Wife discovered the Husband had been having an affair with a person the Court will refer to as Ms D. The parties subsequently reconciled and then separated again for a final time on or about December 2022.

4. These interlocutory proceedings relate to an application by the Husband asking the Court to make orders that Mr…