FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| DEMETRIOU & DEMETRIOU | [2019] FamCA 625 |
| FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where the parties consented to the appointment of a single expert under the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) for the purpose of a joint valuation in respect of real property – where the husband obtained an adversarial expert report a few days before trial– where the husband filed an application two days before the commencement of the trial – where the husband pressed for a conference to take place between the single expert witness and the adversarial witness pursuant to Rule 15.69B of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) – where the husband argued that pursuant to Rule 15.49(2)(a) and (c) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) the adversarial report would likely be tendered and evidence from the expert could be adduced – facts distinguished from Lister & Lister (2015) 52 FamLR 174 – alternative procedure available to submit questions to the single expert under Rule 15.65 the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) – husband’s application was dismissed. |
| Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) rr. 1.12, 15.49, 15.64A, 15.64B, 15.65, 15.68 |
| Lister & Lister (2015) 52 Fam LR 174 Padnall & Padnall (No. 3) [2014] FamCA 904 |
| APPLICANT: | Mr Demetriou |
| RESPONDENT: | Ms Demetriou |
| INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: | Tiyce & Lawyers |
| FILE NUMBER: | SYC | 2580 | of | 2017 |
| DATE DELIVERED: | 4 September 2019 |
| PLACE DELIVERED: | Sydney |
| PLACE HEARD: | Sydney |
| JUDGMENT OF: | Harper J |
| HEARING DATE: | 2 September 2019 |
REPRESENTATION
| COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: | Mr Campton SC |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: | Mills Oakley |
| COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: | Mr Lethbridge SC |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: | Rowlandson & Co Solicitors |
| COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: | Mr Scarlett |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: | Tiyce Lawyers |
Orders
The Applicant Husband’s Application in a Case, filed 29 August 2019, be hereby dismissed.
Leave be granted to the Applicant Husband, pursuant to Rule 15.65 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) to submit questions to the single expert witness, N Group, in accordance with that rule, NOTING that the time limit of 21 days in under Rule 15.65(1)(b) is hereby dispensed with.
I DIRECT that any such questions be submitted by 4:00pm on 5 September 2019.
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 Demetriou & Demetriou 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).
| FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
FILE NUMBER: SYC 2580 of 2017
| Mr Demetriou |
Applicant
And
| Ms Demetriou |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
This judgment is being delivered orally. When settled, additional references to factual matters,…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Demetriou and Demetriou and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2019] FamCA 625
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the Applicant Husband should be granted leave to submit questions to the single expert witness, and specifically, whether the time limit prescribed by Rule 15.65(1)(b) of the *Family Law Rules 2004* (Cth) should be dispensed with. This rule ordinarily requires such questions to be submitted within 21 days of the expert's report being provided.
Harper J reasoned that while the general rule imposes a time limit, the Court retains a discretion to dispense with such limitations in appropriate circumstances. The Court exercised this discretion, granting leave to the Applicant Husband to submit questions to N Group. This decision was made notwithstanding the expiry of the usual 21-day period, indicating a focus on ensuring a fair process for the parties involved in the litigation.
Consequently, the Court ordered that the Applicant Husband's Application in a Case, filed on 29 August 2019, be dismissed. However, leave was granted pursuant to Rule 15.65 of the *Family Law Rules 2004* (Cth) for the Applicant Husband to submit questions to the single expert witness, N Group, with the time limit of 21 days being dispensed with. The Court directed that any such questions were to be submitted by 4:00 pm on 5 September 2019.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
The Applicant Husband’s Application in a Case, filed 29 August 2019, be hereby dismissed.
2.
Leave be granted to the Applicant Husband, pursuant to Rule 15.65 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) to submit questions to the single expert witness, N Group, in accordance with that rule, NOTING that the time limit of 21 days in under Rule 15.65(1)(b) is hereby dispensed with.
3.
I DIRECT that any such questions be submitted by 4:00pm on 5 September 2019.
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.