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
All extant applications be adjourned for hearing in the Registrars Directions Hearing List at 9.30 am on 26 May 2017.
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
- AGLC
- Chen & Chen & Anor (No 2) [2017] FamCA 285
- Case
- [2017] FamCA 285
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
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.