Decaux and Sabri - [2018] FamCAFC 39

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

DECAUX & SABRI

[2018] FamCAFC 39

FAMILY LAW – APPLICATION IN AN APPEAL – Review of registrar’s orders – Whether the Court should provide the applicant with a copy of the transcript – Where the transcript is not essential to the prosecution of the appeal – Whether the Court should prepare the appeal books – Where there is no evidence to support the applicant’s assertion that preparing the appeal books would cause him exceptional hardship – Whether the Registrar should be directed not to take further steps in this matter due to apprehended bias – Where the Court has no power to make such a direction – Whether the Registrar’s orders as to the filing of appeal books and electronic transcript should be stayed – Orders made extending the time for filing the appeal books and electronic transcript – Application otherwise dismissed.

Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) rr 22.13, 22.18, 22.19

Decaux & Sabri [2017] FamCAFC 32
Decaux & Sabri (No 2) [2017] FCCA 2970
Decaux & Sabri (No 3) [2017] FCCA 2973
Finch & Shibo (No 2) [2016] FamCAFC 108
Gallo v Dawson (1990) 93 ALR 479
House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499
Sampson & Hartnett (2013) FLC 93-542

APPLICANT:

Mr Decaux

RESPONDENT:

Ms Sabri

FILE NUMBER:

BRC

7680

2016

APPEAL NUMBER:

119

2017

DATE DELIVERED:

6 March 2018

PLACE DELIVERED:

Melbourne

PLACE HEARD:

Sydney

JUDGMENT OF:

Aldridge J

HEARING DATE:

1 March 2018

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:

Federal Circuit Court of Australia

LOWER COURT JUDGMENT DATE:

3 November 2017

LOWER COURT MNC:

[2017] FCCA 2973

REPRESENTATION

THE APPLICANT:

In person

THE RESPONDENT:

In person

Orders

The time in which the applicant is to file the appeal books and electronic transcript is extended up to and including 14 March 2018.
The Application in an Appeal filed on 5 February 2018 is 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 Decaux & Sabri 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).

THE APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY

Appeal Number: EA 119 of 2017
File Number: BRC 7680 of 2016

Mr Decaux

Applicant

And

Ms Sabri

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

By an Application in an Appeal filed on 5 February 2018, Mr Decaux (“the applicant”) seeks the following orders:
1.Order that both transcripts for the hearing before Judge Terry dated the 2^nd and 3^rd of November 2017 be supplied in accoradnce with the fee waiver provided to the court and also attached as…

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 Decaux and Sabri

Details

AGLC: Decaux and Sabri [2018] FamCAFC 39
Case: [2018] FamCAFC 39
Decision Date: 6 March 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Decaux, the applicant, applied for an extension of time to file appeal books and an electronic transcript in relation to a dispute against Sabri, the respondent. The nature of the original dispute is not detailed in the text, but it was brought before the Court, which is not specified. The application was filed on 5 February 2018. The court was required to determine whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to file the necessary documents and whether the application itself should be dismissed.

The court considered the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal books and electronic transcript. The court found that the applicant had not provided sufficient justification for the delay, and as a result, the application for an extension of time was dismissed. However, the court did grant an extension of time up to and including 14 March 2018 for the applicant to file the appeal books and electronic transcript. The dismissal of the application in an appeal was subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

Orders

Orders of the court

The time in which the applicant is to file the appeal books and electronic transcript is extended up to and including 14 March 2018.

The Application in an Appeal filed on 5 February 2018 is 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.