FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Dobbs & Dobbs (No 4) [2024] FedCFamC1F 683
File number(s): MLC 8793 of 2015 Judgment of: CARTER J Date of judgment: 15 October 2024 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – PENALTY – Where contravention made out – Consideration of penalty –Where the applicant sought the imposition of the maximum fine of 60 penalty units – Where the respondent sought that no penalty be imposed – Where the most appropriate sanction is a fine. Legislation: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) ss4AA
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 112AD, 112AG
Division: Division 1 First Instance Number of paragraphs: 13 Date of hearing: 14 October 2024 Place: Melbourne Solicitor for the Applicant: Cohen Lawyers Counsel for the Respondent: Litigant in person ORDERS
MLC 8793 of 2015 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MS DOBBS
Applicant
AND: MR DOBBS
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
CARTER J
DATE OF ORDER:
15 OCTOBER 2024
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The respondent be fined $7,825.
2.The contravention application filed 22 January 2020 be otherwise dismissed.
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).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
JUSTICE CARTER
On 13 August 2024 I made a declaration that the respondent had without reasonable cause contravened Order 1 of the orders made by the Family Court of Australia on 15 February 2018 and that contravention continued up until 16 July 2019. The respondent had failed to execute a transfer of land in relation to a property which was to be transferred to the applicant. I adjourned the matter to 14 October 2024 for further hearing in relation to the question of penalty.
Sanctions available for failure to comply with orders
Section 112AD(1) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) empowers the Court to impose such sanction or sanctions contained in s 112AD(2) as the Court considers to be the most appropriate in the circumstances.
Section 112AD(2) provides that the available sanctions are:
(a)to require the respondent to enter a bond;
(b)to impose a sentence in accordance with s 112AG;
(c)to fine a person not more than 60 penalty units; or
(d)to impose a sentence of imprisonment.
Ordinarily, the purpose of a contravention is to coerce compliance with court orders.…
Continue reading Dobbs & Dobbs (No 4)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Dobbs & Dobbs (No 4) [2024] FedCFamC1F 683
- Case
- [2024] FedCFamC1F 683
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was to decide the appropriate penalty for the contravention committed by Mr Dobbs. Given that the maximum fine available under the legislation was 60 penalty units, the court had to weigh various factors to determine the most suitable amount. These factors included the nature and seriousness of the contravention, Mr Dobbs's culpability, and any mitigating or aggravating circumstances. The court needed to balance the need for deterrence against the principles of proportionality and fairness.
Carter J, after considering the evidence and arguments presented, found that the most appropriate sanction was a fine. The court noted the seriousness of the contravention but also took into account Mr Dobbs's contrition and the absence of any previous history of such breaches. The court determined that a fine of $7,825 was appropriate, which is less than the maximum penalty but still serves as a significant deterrent. The court dismissed the contravention application in all other respects.
The final orders of the court were that Mr Dobbs be fined $7,825 and that the contravention application, filed on 22 January 2020, be dismissed in all other respects. These orders reflect the court's determination of an appropriate penalty while considering both the need for deterrence and the principles of justice.
Orders
Orders of the court
MLC 8793 of 2015
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN:
MS DOBBS
Applicant
AND:
MR DOBBS
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
CARTER J
DATE OF ORDER:
15 OCTOBER 2024
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The respondent be fined $7,825.
2. The contravention application filed 22 January 2020 be otherwise dismissed.
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.