DEVEREAUX-WARNES -v- HALL & ANOR [2006] WASCA 86

Link to Appeal :

[2006] WASCA 268

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2006] WASCA 86
Court:	THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
Case No:	CACV:132/2005	Heard:	15 MAY 2006
Coram:	WHEELER JA	Delivered:	29/05/06
No of pages:	6	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Application to amend grounds of appeal dismissed Application to adduce new evidence dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	SYLVIA KRISTEN DEVEREAUX-WARNES TANYA HALL PHILLIP RONALD WILSON as Executor of the estate of ANTHONY LAWRENCE PATRICK DUFFY (Dec)
Catchwords:	New evidence of the fluctuation in value of assets Turns on own facts
Legislation:	Nil
Case References:	Hall & Anor v Philip Roland Wilson as Executor of the estate of Anthony Lawrence Patrick Duffy (Dec) & Anor [2005] WASC 207 Knight v Anderson (1997) 17 WAR 85 Mulholland v Mitchell [1971] AC 666 Atlantic 3-Financial (Aust) Pty Ltd v Marler [2004] 1 Qd R 579 Doherty v Liverpool District Hospital (1991) 22 NSWLR 284 Thomas v Bass [2006] WASCA 59

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA) CITATION : DEVEREAUX-WARNES -v- HALL & ANOR [2006] WASCA 86 CORAM : WHEELER JA HEARD : 15 MAY 2006 DELIVERED : 29 MAY 2006 FILE NO/S : CACV 132 of 2005 BETWEEN : SYLVIA KRISTEN DEVEREAUX-WARNES

Appellant

AND

TANYA HALL

First Respondent

PHILLIP RONALD WILSON as Executor of the estate of ANTHONY LAWRENCE PATRICK DUFFY (Dec)

Second Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : MASTER NEWNES

Citation : HALL & ANOR -v- PHILIP ROLAND WILSON as Executor of the estate of ANTHONY LAWRENCE PATRICK DUFFY (Dec) & ANOR [2005] WASC 207

File No : CIV 1709 of 2004

(Page 2)

Catchwords:

New evidence of the fluctuation in value of assets - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Nil

Result:

Application to amend grounds of appeal dismissed

Application to adduce new evidence dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant : Mr A J Aristei

First Respondent : Mr D M Bruns

Second Respondent : No appearance

Solicitors:

Appellant : Elizabeth Wiese & Associates

First Respondent : Hoffmans

Second Respondent : No appearance

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Hall & Anor v Philip Roland Wilson as Executor of the estate of Anthony Lawrence Patrick Duffy (Dec) & Anor [2005] WASC 207
Knight v Anderson (1997) 17 WAR 85
Mulholland v Mitchell [1971] AC 666

Case(s) also cited:

Atlantic 3-Financial (Aust) Pty Ltd v Marler [2004] 1 Qd R 579
Doherty v Liverpool District Hospital (1991) 22 NSWLR 284
Thomas v Bass [2006] WASCA 59

(Page 3)

1 WHEELER JA: This is the appellant's application to adduce new evidence on the hearing of the appeal and to amend the grounds of appeal. The two applications are linked, since proposed grounds 1A and 2A refer to, and rely upon, the new evidence.

2 The background to the applications is as follows. On 22 September 2005, Master Newnes delivered judgment in a…

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 Devereaux-Warnes v Hall

Details

AGLC: Devereaux-Warnes v Hall [2006] WASCA 86
Case: [2006] WASCA 86
Decision Date: 29 MAY 2006

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Devereaux-Warnes v Hall, the parties involved were Devereaux-Warnes, the appellant, and Hall, the respondent. The dispute was centered on the fluctuation in the value of assets that were subject to a property settlement agreement. The case was heard in the Family Court of Australia. The appeal was brought before the Full Court, which was tasked with reviewing the decision made by the primary judge.

The legal issues before the court involved the appellant's attempt to amend the grounds of appeal and to adduce new evidence regarding the value of assets. The court had to determine whether the appellant was entitled to amend the grounds of appeal and whether the new evidence should be admitted. The court had to consider the principles of finality and fairness in family law proceedings, as well as the relevance and admissibility of new evidence.

The court found that the appellant's application to amend the grounds of appeal was not justified, as the new grounds did not arise from the original appeal but were instead a repackaging of the existing grounds. The court held that the application to adduce new evidence was also unsuccessful, as the evidence was not relevant to the original decision and would not have made a difference to the outcome. The court emphasised the importance of finality in family law proceedings and noted that the new evidence was not admissible as it was not relevant to the original decision. The court dismissed both applications and upheld the decision of the primary judge.

The orders of the court were that the application to amend the grounds of appeal and the application to adduce new evidence were both dismissed. The decision of the primary judge was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application to amend grounds of appeal dismissed

Application to adduce new evidence 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.