Chen & Chen & Anor (No 2)

Case [2017] FamCA 285


FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

CHEN & CHEN AND ANOR (NO 2) [2017] FamCA 285
FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Pleadings- – Where there are multiple parties and properties-where the wife seeks orders against third parties- where the wife has filed a Statement of Facts and Contentions _Whether the wife should be required to file a Statement of Claim in accordance with the Rules of the Supreme Court of Victoria-procedural fairness- distinction made between the merits of an application versus whether it sufficiently identifies the nature and basis of a claim-where it is found that the wife’s lack of knowledge and discovery has prevented a more detailed Statement of Facts and Contentions
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2015 (Vic)
Aon Risk Services Australia Ltd v Australian National University (2009) 239 CLR 175Banque Commericale SA v Akhil Holdings Ltd [1990] HCA 11
Bourke & Bourke and Anor [2009] FamCA 27
APPLICANT: Ms Chen
FIRST RESPONDENT: Mr Chen
SECOND RESPONDENT: Ms Quen
THIRD RESPONDENT: C Pty Ltd
FILE NUMBER: MLC 5805 of 2016
DATE DELIVERED: 5 May 2017
PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne
PLACE HEARD: Melbourne
JUDGMENT OF: Macmillan J
HEARING DATE: In Chambers

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Dickson QC
SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Taussig Cherrie Fildes
COUNSEL FOR THE FIRST RESPONDENT: Mr Bartfield QC
SOLICITOR FOR THE FIRST RESPONDENT: Landers & Rogers
COUNSEL FOR THE SECOND RESPONDENT: Dr Ingleby
SOLICITOR FOR THE SECOND RESPONDENT: Kenna Teasdale Lawyers
THE THIRD RESPONDENT: N/A
THE FOURTH RESPONDENT: N/A
THE FIFTH RESPONDENT: N/A
THE SIXTH RESPONDENT: N/A
THE SEVENTH RESPONDENT: N/A
THE EIGHTH RESPONDENT: N/A
THE NINTH RESPONDENT: N/A
THE TENTH RESPONDENT: N/A

Orders

IT IS ORDERED THAT

  1. All extant applications be adjourned for hearing in the Registrars Directions Hearing List at 9.30 am on 26 May 2017.

  2. The Application in a Case filed by the Second Named Respondent on 31 August 2016 be otherwise dismissed.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Chen & Chen and Ors (No 2) has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: MLC 5805  of 2016

Ms Chen

Applicant

And

Mr Chen

First Respondent

And

Ms Quen

Second Respondent

And

C Pty Ltd

Third Respondent

And

Quen Pty Ltd (ACN …)

Fourth Respondent

And

E Pty Ltd (ACN …)

Fifth Respondent

And

Company F (ACN …)

Sixth Respondent

And

G Pty Ltd (ACN …)

Seventh Respondent

And

Mr A Chen

Eighth Respondent

And

Mr B Chen

Ninth Respondent

Mr C…

Continue reading Chen & Chen & Anor (No 2)

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Chen & Chen & Anor (No 2) [2017] FamCA 285
Case
[2017] FamCA 285
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Chen & Chen & Anor (No 2)*, the wife sought orders against third parties in family law proceedings. The central dispute concerned whether the wife, having filed a Statement of Facts and Contentions, should be required to file a Statement of Claim in accordance with the Rules of the Supreme Court of Victoria, given the presence of multiple parties and properties.

The court was required to determine whether the wife's Statement of Facts and Contentions sufficiently identified the nature and basis of her claims against the third parties, or if a formal Statement of Claim was necessary to ensure procedural fairness. A key consideration was the wife's asserted lack of knowledge and reliance on discovery, which she contended had prevented a more detailed pleading.

Macmillan J distinguished between the merits of an application and whether it adequately identified the nature and basis of a claim. The court found that the wife's Statement of Facts and Contentions, in the context of her limited knowledge and the ongoing discovery process, was sufficient to identify the nature and basis of her claims against the third parties, thereby obviating the need for a formal Statement of Claim.

Consequently, all extant applications were adjourned for hearing in the Registrars Directions Hearing List, and the Application in a Case filed by the Second Named Respondent on 31 August 2016 was dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1.

All extant applications be adjourned for hearing in the Registrars Directions Hearing List at 9.30 am on 26 May 2017.

2.

The Application in a Case filed by the Second Named Respondent on 31 August 2016 be otherwise dismissed.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

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.