CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR & DAWSON - [2014] FCCA 2124

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR & DAWSON

[2014] FCCA 2124

Catchwords:
CHILD SUPPORT – Stay –application for stay – enforcement proceedings – adjournment – application for adjournment – where party has brought a departure application in another court.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Venue – whether Application should be transferred to another Registry – where proceedings in Newcastle, Sydney and Melbourne – where it is preferable that all matters should be dealt with in the one Registry of the Court.

Legislation:

Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth), s.116

Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth), s.111C

Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 r.8.01

Cases cited:
Bagala & Bagala [2009] FMCAfam 953

Applicant:

CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR

Respondent:

MR DAWSON

File Number:

SYC 1928 of 2014

Judgment of:

Judge Scarlett

Hearing date:

9 September 2014

Date of Last Submission:

9 September 2014

Delivered at:

Sydney

Delivered on:

12 September 2014

REPRESENTATION

Solicitor for the Applicant:

Ms Fusitu'a

Solicitors for the Applicant:

Australian Government Solicitor

Solicitor for the Respondent:

Mr Merewether (agent); Mr Bacon

Solicitors for the Respondent:

Manby and Scott

ORDERS

The Response filed on 15 August 2014 is dismissed.
The Respondent is to file and serve a further Response accompanied by an affidavit setting out the facts upon which he seeks to rely within twenty-one (21) days.
The Application is transferred to the Newcastle Registry of the Court to be listed for hearing before Judge Scarlett at 10:00 am on Thursday 16 October 2014.
A copy of this decision is to be forwarded to the Registrar of the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court with the request that it be placed on the file FL 23/2014 returnable before the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court at 10.00 am on 18 September 2014.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Child Support Registrar & Dawson is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYC 1928 of 2014

CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR

Applicant

And

MR DAWSON

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Application

This is an Application by the Respondent to an Application in a Case seeking enforcement of arrears of child support and late payment penalties for orders that arrears of child support should not be quantified and the proceedings should be adjourned until after the completion of other proceedings in the Melbourne Magistrates Court.
The application is opposed by the Child Support Registrar.

Orders Sought

By his handwritten Response filed on 15 August 2014 the Respondent seeks the following orders:
1. The Respondent’s Child Support Arrears be quantified once the current proceedings between the Respondent and payee of Child Support (Ms Bolton) are completed. The Respondent thereafter pay those arrears within 90 days.
2. The matter be adjourned until the current proceedings between the Respondent and payee of Child Support (Ms Bolton) are completed.
The “current proceedings” to which the Respondent refers consist of an Application to the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court seeking a departure order and other orders relating to…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR & DAWSON

Details

AGLC: CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR & DAWSON [2014] FCCA 2124
Case: [2014] FCCA 2124
Decision Date: 12 September 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application before Judge Scarlett in the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia. The dispute involved the Child Support Registrar and a respondent, Mr. Dawson, in relation to child support proceedings. The specific nature of the dispute, beyond its child support context, is not detailed in the provided text.

The court was required to determine the appropriate procedural steps to advance the child support proceedings. This included considering the adequacy of the respondent's filed Response and the necessity for further factual disclosure. The court also had to decide on the venue and timing for the future hearing of the application.

Judge Scarlett ordered that the respondent's Response filed on 15 August 2014 be dismissed. The court directed the respondent to file and serve a new Response, supported by an affidavit detailing the factual basis of his claims, within twenty-one days. Furthermore, the application was transferred to the Newcastle Registry for a hearing before Judge Scarlett on 16 October 2014. A copy of the decision was also to be sent to the Registrar of the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court for placement on a specific file, returnable before that court on 18 September 2014.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Response filed on 15 August 2014 is dismissed.

The Respondent is to file and serve a further Response accompanied by an affidavit setting out the facts upon which he seeks to rely within twenty-one (21) days.

The Application is transferred to the Newcastle Registry of the Court to be listed for hearing before Judge Scarlett at 10:00 am on Thursday 16 October 2014.

A copy of this decision is to be forwarded to the Registrar of the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court with the request that it be placed on the file FL 23/2014 returnable before the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court at 10.00 am on 18 September 2014.

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.