Fern & Fern (No. 2)

Case [2021] FamCA 643


FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Fern & Fern (No. 2) [2021] FamCA 643

File number(s): BRC 9504 of 2014
Judgment of: HOWARD J
Date of judgment: 18 August 2021
Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – NULLITY OF MARRIAGE – where the wife was lawfully married to another person at the time of the subject marriage – where there was (in any event) no real consent to the marriage – mistake as to the identity of the respondent wife at the time of the purported marriage due to her fraudulent actions – where the marriage was therefore void – decree of nullity granted.
Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 51, 79

Marriage Act 1961 (Cth) s 23B

Cases cited: Campani & Suyapto [2008] FamCA 1121
In the marriage of Osman & Mourrali (1989) 96 FLR 362
Moss & Moss [1897] P 263
Number of paragraphs: 32
Date of last submission/s: 18 August 2021
Date of hearing: 18 August 2021
Place: Brisbane
Solicitor for the Applicant: Turnbull Mylne Solicitors
There being no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent.

ORDERS

BRC 9504 of 2014
BETWEEN:

MR FERN
Applicant

AND:

MS FERN
Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

HOWARD J

DATE OF ORDER:

18 AUGUST 2021

THE COURT ORDERS ON A FINAL BASIS:

1.That the marriage solemnised at Brisbane in the State of Queensland in 2006 between the applicant, Mr Fern and the respondent Ms Fern (also known as Ms X) is declared to be void pursuant to section 23B(1)(a) and section 23B(1)(d)(i) and (ii) of the Marriage Act 1961 (Cth) and thus the said marriage is a nullity.

2.That the respondent pay the applicant’s costs fixed sum of $8,800.

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 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

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

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

A.         These reasons were delivered ex tempore on 18 August 2021 and have been settled and corrected for grammatical errors in order to convey the precise intention of the Court.

  1. The applicant before the Court is Mr Fern. Mr Fern was born in 1958. By an Amended Initiating Application filed on 27 April 2020, the applicant seeks the following orders against the respondent. Firstly, a declaration that the marriage between the applicant and the respondent is void pursuant to section 23B(1)(a) of the Marriage Act 1961 (Cth). Furthermore, the applicant seeks a declaration that the marriage between the applicant and the respondent is void pursuant to section 23B(1)(d)(i) and (ii) of the Marriage Act 1961 (Cth). The applicant seeks a decree of nullity in…

Continue reading Fern & Fern (No. 2)

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Fern & Fern (No. 2) [2021] FamCA 643
Case
[2021] FamCA 643
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Fern & Fern (No. 2)*, Howard J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by Mr Fern (the applicant) seeking a declaration that his marriage to Ms Fern (the respondent) was void. The dispute arose from the circumstances surrounding the solemnisation of the marriage in 2006.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the marriage was void due to the respondent being lawfully married to another person at the time of the purported marriage, and alternatively, whether there was a lack of real consent to the marriage due to mistake as to the identity of the respondent, induced by her fraudulent actions.

Howard J found that the marriage was void pursuant to sections 23B(1)(a) and 23B(1)(d)(i) and (ii) of the *Marriage Act 1961* (Cth). The reasoning applied was that the respondent was already married at the time of the ceremony, and further, that the applicant did not give real consent to the marriage due to a mistake regarding the respondent's identity, which was a consequence of her fraudulent conduct.

Consequently, the court declared the marriage to be a nullity and ordered that the respondent pay the applicant's costs in the sum of $8,800.

Orders

Orders of the court

BRC 9504 of 2014

BETWEEN:

MR FERN

Applicant

AND:

MS FERN

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

HOWARD J

DATE OF ORDER:

18 AUGUST 2021

THE COURT ORDERS ON A FINAL BASIS:

1. That the marriage solemnised at Brisbane in the State of Queensland in 2006 between the applicant, Mr Fern and the respondent Ms Fern (also known as Ms X) is declared to be void pursuant to section 23B(1)(a) and section 23B(1)(d)(i) and (ii) of the Marriage Act 1961 (Cth) and thus the said marriage is a nullity.

2. That the respondent pay the applicant’s costs fixed sum of $8,800.

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 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

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.