COLLINS & RICARDO - [2015] FamCAFC 48

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

COLLINS & RICARDO

[2015] FamCAFC 48

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – Application to extend time to appeal – Where the father is involved in multiple ongoing proceedings – Where the father claims he did not receive instructions from the Appeals Registry in sufficient time to lodge his appeal – Where the father claims he was occupied prosecuting other matters – Whether the trial judge erred in dismissing the father’s application for interim parenting orders – Application dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – Application to reinstate abandoned appeal – Where the father is involved in multiple ongoing proceedings – Where the father claims he did not receive instructions from the Appeals Registry in sufficient time to comply with the Family Court Rules 2004 (Cth) – Where the father is an experienced litigant – Application dismissed.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

Family Court Rules 2004 (Cth) r 22.13

Gallo v Dawson (1990) 93 ALR 479
Jackamarra v Krakouer (1998) 195 CLR 516
Rand & Rand [2009] FamCAFC 88

APPLICANT:

Mr Collins

RESPONDENT:

Ms Ricardo

FILE NUMBER:

SYC

4959

2009

APPEAL NUMBERS:	EA	6	of	2015
EA	18	of	2015

DATE DELIVERED:

27 March 2015

PLACE DELIVERED:

Sydney

PLACE HEARD:

Sydney

JUDGMENT OF:

Ainslie-Wallace J

HEARING DATE:

24 March 2015

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:

Family Court of Australia

LOWER COURT JUDGMENT DATES:	19 December 2014
15 January 2015

LOWER COURT MNC:	[2014] FamCA 1155
[2015] FamCA 7

REPRESENTATION

THE APPLICANT:

In person

THE RESPONDENT:

In person attending by telephone link

Orders

Application for reinstatement of appeal EA 6 of 2015 against order of Loughnan J made on 19 December 2014 be dismissed.
Application for extension of time to appeal against orders of Stevenson J of

15 January 2015 be dismissed.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Collins & Ricardo has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

THE APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

Appeal Numbers: EA 6 of 2015
EA 18 of 2015
File Number: SYC 4959 of 2009

Mr Collins

Applicant

and

Ms Ricardo

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Mr Collins (“the father”) brings two applications in relation to two appeals. The first is an application filed on 19 February 2015 seeking to reinstate an appeal, EA 6 of 2015, against orders made by Loughnan J and which was deemed to have been abandoned because of the father’s failure to file a draft index to the appeal book within the prescribed time.
The second application, also filed on 19 February 2015, seeks an extension of time in which to bring an appeal against orders made by Stevenson J on

15 January 2015 in which she dismissed the father’s application for interim parenting orders.

Orders of Loughnan J

This application relates to the father’s appeal against orders made by

Loughnan J on 19 December 2014 that relate to the father’s contravention application against Ms Ricardo (“the mother”)…

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 COLLINS & RICARDO

Details

AGLC: COLLINS & RICARDO [2015] FamCAFC 48
Case: [2015] FamCAFC 48
Decision Date: 27 March 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this matter, Collins and Ricardo presented their case in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, where the primary focus was on the father's appeal against various family law decisions. The father sought to extend the time for appealing against the orders made by the trial judge and to reinstate an abandoned appeal. He argued that he had not received timely instructions from the Appeals Registry, was preoccupied with other legal matters, and therefore, he could not lodge his appeal within the stipulated time.

The legal issues central to the case involved whether the trial judge had erred in dismissing the father's application for interim parenting orders and whether the father's claims of insufficient notice from the Appeals Registry were valid grounds for extending the time to appeal. The court had to determine if the father's assertions of being occupied with other ongoing proceedings and the alleged delay in receiving instructions from the Appeals Registry constituted exceptional circumstances warranting relief.

The court carefully considered the father's submissions, noting his experience as a litigant and the importance of adhering to procedural rules. The court found that the father had not demonstrated exceptional circumstances or any error in the trial judge’s dismissal of his interim parenting orders. The court also noted that the father had ample opportunity to comply with the Appeals Registry’s instructions, given his familiarity with the procedural requirements. Therefore, the court dismissed both the application to extend the time to appeal and the application to reinstate the abandoned appeal.

The court made two specific orders: the application for reinstatement of the appeal against the order made by Loughnan J on 19 December 2014 was dismissed, and the application for an extension of time to appeal against the orders made by Stevenson J on 15 January 2015 was also dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application for reinstatement of appeal EA 6 of 2015 against order of Loughnan J made on 19 December 2014 be dismissed.

Application for extension of time to appeal against orders of Stevenson J of

15 January 2015 be dismissed.

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.