Dickens and Dickens

Case [2013] FamCA 813


FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

DICKENS & DICKENS [2013] FamCA 813
FAMILY LAW – husband seeks to have the wife dealt with in relation to contempt pursuant to s112AP of the Family Law Act (1975) (Cth) and, in a separate application, for 16 counts of contravention
APPLICANT: Mr Dickens
RESPONDENT: Ms Dickens
FILE NUMBER: SYC 739 of 2010
DATE DELIVERED: 14 October 2013
PLACE DELIVERED: Sydney
PLACE HEARD: Sydney
JUDGMENT OF: Rees J
HEARING DATE: 11 October 2013

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: In Person
COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Harper
SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Hamish Cumming Family Lawyers

Orders

IT IS ORDERED

  1. That the application of the husband for orders pursuant to s112AP of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) be dismissed.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY

FILE NUMBER:

Mr Dickens

Applicant

And

Ms Dickens

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. Before the court are proceedings instituted by Mr Dickens (“the husband”) asking that Ms Dickens (“the wife”) be dealt with for alleged breaches of orders relating to their children, B born in 2001 (“B”) and C born in 2003 (“C”).

  2. The husband seeks to have the wife dealt with in relation to contempt pursuant to s112AP of the Family Law Act (1975) (Cth) and, in a separate application filed the same day, for 16 counts of contravention.

THE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS

  1. By an amended application filed 3 October 2013, supported by an affidavit sworn by him on 2 October 2013, the husband asks that the wife be dealt with for eight counts of contempt pursuant to section 112AP of the Family Law Act.

  2. Section 112AP is set out in full below;

  3. Section 112AP provides:

    112AP Contempt

    (1)Subject to subsection (1A), this section applies to a contempt of a court that:

    (a) does not constitute a contravention of an order under this Act; or

    (b) constitutes a contravention of an order under this Act and involves a flagrant challenge to the authority of the court.

    (1A) This section does not apply to a contempt that constitutes a contravention of a maintenance order if the order has been complied with before the matter of the contravention comes before the court.

    (2)In spite of any other law, a court having jurisdiction under this Act may punish a person for contempt of that court.

    (3)The applicable Rules of Court may provide for practice and procedure as to charging with contempt and the hearing of the charge.

    (4)Where a natural person is in contempt, the court may punish the contempt by committal to prison or fine or both.

    (5)Where a corporation is in contempt, the court may punish the contempt by sequestration or fine or both.

    (6)The court may make an order for:

    (a) punishment on terms;

    (b) suspension of punishment; or

    (c) the giving of security for good…

Continue reading Dickens and Dickens

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Dickens and Dickens [2013] FamCA 813
Case
[2013] FamCA 813
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Dickens and Dickens*, heard before Rees J, the husband sought orders pursuant to s 112AP of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The specific nature of the dispute between the parties is not detailed in the provided text, beyond the husband's application under this section of the Act.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the husband's application for orders under s 112AP of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) should be granted. This section of the Act pertains to the enforcement of financial and property settlement orders.

Rees J dismissed the husband's application. The reasoning behind this dismissal is not elaborated upon in the provided text, but the outcome indicates that the court found no grounds to grant the orders sought by the husband under s 112AP.

Orders

Orders of the court

IT IS ORDERED

1.

That the application of the husband for orders pursuant to s112AP of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) 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.