FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Darvish & Karo (No 2) [2024] FedCFamC2F 1041
File number(s): SYC 9035 of 2023 Judgment of: JUDGE STREET Date of judgment: 26 July 2024 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – PROCEDURE - application in a proceeding - adjournment dismissed Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) Division: Division 2 Family Law Number of paragraphs: 3 Date of hearing: 26 July 2024 Place: Sydney Counsel for the Applicant: Ms S Mahony Solicitor for the Applicant: I & J Law Respondent: Appeared via video and audio-link ORDERS
SYC 9035 of 2023
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN: MS DARVISH
Applicant
AND: MR KARO
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE STREET
DATE OF ORDER:
26 JULY 2024
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The Application in a Proceeding dated 18 July 2024 is dismissed.
2.The application for an adjournment is refused.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under a pseudonym has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
JUDGE STREET
The husband has asked the Court for an adjournment of the proceedings and sought to press the Application in a Proceeding that was filed on the on 18 July 2024 for an adjournment. The husband contends that he has not been able to put on evidence that he wished to put on and that he has not had time to prepare a case outline. This matter was fixed for hearing pursuant to the orders made on 31 May 2024. Those orders provided the husband an opportunity to put on a consolidated affidavit and any expert witness evidence by 1 July 2024. Those orders also provided both parties the opportunity to file a case outline by 25 July 2024.
The husband has had a fair opportunity to put on evidence if he wished to do so, the husband failed to do so. The original underlying ground for an adjournment raised by the Application in a Proceedings was based on the notice to produce and no longer exists given that compliance with the same has been dispensed with. The other grounds are without substance and would give rise to delay of these divorce proceedings and the incurring of further costs. The Court has taken into account the principles in s 43, s 68B and s 69ZN of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) and the overarching purpose in s 95 of the Act.
The Court is not satisfied an adjournment is warranted in the interest of the administration of justice. Accordingly, the Court makes the above orders.
I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Oral Published Reasons for Judgment of Judge Street. Associate:
Dated: 7 August 2024
- AGLC
- Darvish & Karo (No 2) [2024] FedCFamC2F 1041
- Case
- [2024] FedCFamC2F 1041
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered the urgency of the matters at hand and the potential impact on the children if the proceeding was delayed. Judge Street noted that the application was made shortly before the scheduled hearing and that the reasons provided did not sufficiently demonstrate a need for further time to prepare. Furthermore, the court emphasised the importance of finality in family law proceedings, particularly when children's welfare was involved. Judge Street concluded that the application did not meet the threshold for an adjournment and that proceeding with the scheduled hearing was in the best interest of the children.
As a result, the application for an adjournment was dismissed, and the proceeding was scheduled to continue as planned. The court's decision underscored the importance of timely resolution in family law matters, especially those involving children. The final orders reflect the court's decision to refuse the adjournment and proceed with the hearing, ensuring that the children's welfare remains a priority.
Orders
Orders of the court
SYC 9035 of 2023
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:
MS DARVISH
Applicant
AND:
MR KARO
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
JUDGE STREET
DATE OF ORDER:
26 JULY 2024
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The Application in a Proceeding dated 18 July 2024 is dismissed.
2. The application for an adjournment is refused.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
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.