Field and Kingston - [2019] FamCA 14

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FIELD & KINGSTON

[2019] FamCA 14

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim Hearing – Where the wife seeks orders that a joint letter of instruction be sent for the valuation of assets – where the wife seeks an order for cross-examination of a witness prior to the final hearing due to the witness’s ill health – where the husband seeks leave to provide financial documents to Centrelink and the Australian Taxation Office – where orders are made as sought by the wife – where valuations of the assets are ordered to prepare the matter for final hearing.

Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 128

Field & Kingston [2017] FamCA 208
Field & Kingston (No. 2) [2017] FamCA 1071
Field & Kingston [2018] FamCAFC 145
Ascot Investments Pty Ltd v Harper and Anor [1981] HCA 1; (1981) FLC 91-000
In the Marriage ofBiltoft (1995) 19 Fam LR 82; (1995) FLC 92-614; (1995) FamCA 45
Malpass & Mayson [2000] FamCA 1253

APPLICANT:

Ms Field

RESPONDENT:

Mr Kingston

FILE NUMBER:

PAC

2095

2014

DATE DELIVERED:

21 January 2019

PLACE DELIVERED:

Parramatta

PLACE HEARD:

Parramatta

JUDGMENT OF:

Hannam J

HEARING DATE:

22 May 2018, 14 September 2018

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT:

Mr Campton SC

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT:	Matthews Folbigg Pty Ltd
COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT:	Mr Williams

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Barkus Doolan

Orders

That the wife shall and is hereby authorised to forthwith sign and send the joint letter of instruction to the expert Mr E such letter dated 19 February 2018 and annexed to the application in a case and marked A.
That the Order made on 21 August 2015 requiring a valuation of CC or the Company F be discharged.
That the wife shall and is hereby authorised to forthwith sign and send the joint letter of instruction to the expert Mr G for the valuation of H Pty Ltd., such letter dated 24 February 2018 and annexed to the application in a case and marked B.
That pursuant to Part 11.1 of the Family Law Rules, that the wife be permitted to call her father Mr J Field as a witness and make him available for cross examination prior to the balance of the trial if such an order is required due to his state of health.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

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

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).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT PARRAMATTA

FILE NUMBER: PAC 2095 of 2014

Ms Field

Applicant

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Field and Kingston

Details

AGLC: Field and Kingston [2019] FamCA 14
Case: [2019] FamCA 14
Decision Date: 21 January 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Field and Kingston*, heard before Hannam J, the dispute concerned the valuation of assets in family law proceedings. The wife sought orders authorising her to sign and send joint letters of instruction to experts for the valuation of specific entities, and also sought permission to call her father as a witness due to his health.

The court was required to determine whether to discharge a previous order for the valuation of "CC or the Company F" and whether to permit the wife to instruct an expert to value "H Pty Ltd." Furthermore, the court had to consider the wife's application to call her father as a witness, subject to his health and the need for his cross-examination prior to the conclusion of the trial.

Hannam J ordered that the wife be authorised to sign and send the joint letters of instruction to the experts for the respective valuations. The previous order requiring the valuation of "CC or the Company F" was discharged. The court also permitted the wife to call her father as a witness, with provisions for his availability for cross-examination if necessitated by his health.

Orders

Orders of the court

That the wife shall and is hereby authorised to forthwith sign and send the joint letter of instruction to the expert Mr E such letter dated 19 February 2018 and annexed to the application in a case and marked A.

That the Order made on 21 August 2015 requiring a valuation of CC or the Company F be discharged.

That the wife shall and is hereby authorised to forthwith sign and send the joint letter of instruction to the expert Mr G for the valuation of H Pty Ltd., such letter dated 24 February 2018 and annexed to the application in a case and marked B.

That pursuant to Part 11.1 of the Family Law Rules, that the wife be permitted to call her father Mr J Field as a witness and make him available for cross examination prior to the balance of the trial if such an order is required due to his state of health.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

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.