Fadel and Jarrah

[2014] FCCA 2313

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FADEL & JARRAH [2014] FCCA 2313

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Contested divorce – consideration as to whether the parties were married.

Legislation:

Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), ss.153, 156

Family Law Act 1975, s.55A(1)(b)(ii)

Applicant: MS FADEL

Respondent: MR JARRAH

File Number: PAC 2015 of 2011

Judgment of: Judge Dunkley

Hearing date: 7 October 2014

Date of Last Submission: 7 October 2014

Delivered at: Parramatta

Delivered on: 3 November 2014

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Morley

Solicitors for the Applicant: Mahony Family Lawyers

For the Respondent: Self-represented

ORDERS

1. A Divorce Order is pronounced with respect to the parties’ marriage in Egypt on [omitted] 2002.

2. That Divorce Order to become absolute within one month.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Fadel & Jarrah is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT PARRAMATTA

PAC 2015 of 2011

MS FADEL

Applicant

And

MR JARRAH

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is the Judgment arising from the hearing of a contested divorce.

2. The parties involved in the hearing were Ms Fadel (the Applicant) and Mr Jarrah (the Respondent).

3. It was the Applicant’s case that the parties were married in Egypt on [omitted] 2002 in a religious ceremony that was then civilly registered with the Egyptian authorities on [omitted] 2002.

4. It was the Respondent’s case that the parties became engaged at a religious ceremony on [omitted] 2002 but were never married.

5. It was further the Respondent’s case that he was not one and the same person referred to in the “Copy of Marriage Entry” issued by the Arab Republic of Egypt, Ministry of Interior Civil Status Department[1].

   [1] Exhibit ‘A’

6. For those two reasons he opposed the making of a divorce order on the Application for Divorce filed by Ms Fadel on 20 February 2014.

7. Rhetorically one might ask “why oppose a divorce of a marriage that you say never occurred?” The Respondent was unable to articulate a coherent response to the rhetorical question perhaps due to language difficulties, English not being his primary language.

Documents

1. The Applicant relied on:

   a)Application for Divorce filed on 20 February 2014;

   b)Affidavit Translation of Marriage Certificate e-filed on 16 May 2014;

   c)Affidavit of Ms B affirmed 6 May 2014 filed on 8 May 2014;

   d)Affidavit of the Applicant sworn 25 March 2014 filed on 1 April 2014;

   e)Affidavit of the Applicant sworn 22 September 2014 filed on 22 September 2014; and

   f)Affidavit of Ms F sworn 9 September 2014 e-filed on 22 September 2014.

2. The Respondent relied on:

   a)Response to Divorce filed on 27 June 2014; and

   b)Affidavit of the Respondent sworn 26 September 2014 filed on 26 September 2014.

Exhibits

• A – Copy of Marriage Entry;

• B – Photocopy of the Respondent’s Egyptian Identification Card.

Conduct of the proceedings

1. The Respondent initially sought an adjournment as the determination of his appeal of his legal aid refusal was still outstanding.

2. His application for adjournment was dismissed for reasons…