Chi and Xana

In the matter of *Chi and Xana*, heard before Baumann J, the applicant, Ms Chi, sought declarations regarding the validity of an annulment of her marriage to the respondent, Mr Xana. The marriage was solemnised in Australia on 9 October 2015, and an annulment was granted in Country D on 10 May 2018. The primary dispute concerned whether this foreign annulment was recognised under Australian law.

The court was required to determine two principal legal issues. Firstly, whether personal service upon the respondent, Mr Xana, could be dispensed with. Secondly, and more significantly, the court had to decide whether the annulment granted in Country D on 10 May 2018 was a valid annulment for the purposes of Australian law, given the marriage was solemnised in Australia.

Baumann J reasoned that dispensing with personal service on Mr Xana was appropriate in the circumstances, likely due to difficulties in locating him or effecting service. Regarding the validity of the foreign annulment, the court applied principles of private international law concerning the recognition of foreign judgments and decrees. The court found that the annulment granted in Country D was valid for the purposes of Australian law, implying that the foreign jurisdiction had competent jurisdiction and that the proceedings were conducted in a manner consistent with Australian notions of procedural fairness.

Consequently, Baumann J made orders declaring the annulment granted on 10 May 2018 in Country D to be valid for Australian law purposes and dispensed with personal service upon Mr Xana. Leave was granted to the applicant to provide a copy of the order to the Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages (Queensland). All other applications made by the applicant were dismissed.