Dunnett and Dunnett
Case
•
[2013] FamCA 529
•15 July 2013
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Dunnett and Dunnett [2013] FamCA 529
[2013] FamCA 529
15 July 2013
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In *Dunnett and Dunnett*, Hogan J of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia considered an application by Ms Dunnett seeking to set aside final property orders made in 2008. The application was brought pursuant to section 79A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Mr Dunnett opposed the application.
The central legal issue before the court was whether Ms Dunnett had established sufficient grounds to justify setting aside the existing final property orders under section 79A of the Act. This section permits the court to vary or set aside orders where there has been a miscarriage of justice due to fraud, duress, suppression of evidence, or failure to disclose material matters, or by reason of other circumstances.
Hogan J found that Ms Dunnett had failed to demonstrate any of the grounds required by section 79A. The court was not satisfied that there had been fraud, duress, or any other vitiating factor that would lead to a miscarriage of justice. Consequently, the court dismissed Ms Dunnett's application.
In light of the repeated nature of Ms Dunnett's applications and the lack of merit in the present one, Hogan J made orders restraining Ms Dunnett from filing any further applications seeking orders under section 79A without first obtaining leave of the court, pursuant to section 118 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Ms Dunnett was also ordered to pay Mr Dunnett's costs fixed at $1,000.00.
The central legal issue before the court was whether Ms Dunnett had established sufficient grounds to justify setting aside the existing final property orders under section 79A of the Act. This section permits the court to vary or set aside orders where there has been a miscarriage of justice due to fraud, duress, suppression of evidence, or failure to disclose material matters, or by reason of other circumstances.
Hogan J found that Ms Dunnett had failed to demonstrate any of the grounds required by section 79A. The court was not satisfied that there had been fraud, duress, or any other vitiating factor that would lead to a miscarriage of justice. Consequently, the court dismissed Ms Dunnett's application.
In light of the repeated nature of Ms Dunnett's applications and the lack of merit in the present one, Hogan J made orders restraining Ms Dunnett from filing any further applications seeking orders under section 79A without first obtaining leave of the court, pursuant to section 118 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Ms Dunnett was also ordered to pay Mr Dunnett's costs fixed at $1,000.00.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Injunction
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Res Judicata
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Dunnett and Dunnett [2013] FamCA 529
Most Recent Citation
Selkirk and Caporn and Anor [2016] FCWA 26
Cases Citing This Decision
2
KNIGHT & ELLINGTON
[2018] FamCA 892
Selkirk and Caporn and Anor
[2016] FCWA 26
Cases Cited
10
Statutory Material Cited
2
Ricci & Jones
[2011] FamCAFC 222
Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd (No 4)
[2001] FCA 1106
Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd (No 4)
[2001] FCA 1106