FIRTH & FIRTH - [2020] FamCA 637

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FIRTH & FIRTH

[2020] FamCA 637

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Where application for interim property orders – Where consideration of applicable principles – Where order made for a payment of $500,000 by the husband to the wife.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where application for injunction – Where consideration of applicable principles – Where order as sought by the wife refused.

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where application for disclosure orders– Where due to proximity of final hearing and the imminent release of a single expert report orders sought as to particular disclosure refused.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 75, 79, 114

Harris & Harris (1993) FLC 92-378
Patterson v BTR Engineering (Aust) Ltd (1989) 18 NSWLR 319
Skyworks v 32 Drummoyne Road [2017] NSWSC 343
Strahan & Strahan [2009] FamCAFC 166; (2011) FLC 93-466
Tsiang & Wu [2019] FamCAFC 128; (2019) FLC 93-911

APPLICANT:

Ms Firth

RESPONDENT:

Mr Firth

FILE NUMBER:

PAC

5216

2017

DATE DELIVERED:

3 August 2020

PLACE DELIVERED:

Parramatta

PLACE HEARD:

Parramatta

JUDGMENT OF:

Foster J

HEARING DATE:

13 May 2020 and by way of written submissions last received on 11 June 2020

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT:

Ms Picker

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT:

Ede Family Law

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Ms Gillies SC

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Marsdens Law Group

Orders

That within 14 days from this date the husband cause to be paid to the wife or as she may otherwise direct in writing the sum of $500,000 with the characterisation of such sum reserved to final trial.
That, otherwise, the Application in a Case filed by the wife on 30 March 2020 as amended be dismissed.
That, otherwise, the Response by the husband filed 6 May 2020 to the wife’s Application in a Case be dismissed.
That any application for costs arising from these orders be made by way of written submission filed and served within one month from this date with any submissions in response thereto to be filed and served within a further 14 days and that thereafter judgment as to costs reserved to chambers.

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 Firth & Firth 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 5216 of 2017

Ms Firth

Applicant

And

Mr Firth

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

In the context of long-running property and parenting proceedings the applicant wife sought interlocutory orders in her Amended Application in…

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 FIRTH & FIRTH

Details

AGLC: FIRTH & FIRTH [2020] FamCA 637
Case: [2020] FamCA 637
Decision Date: 3 August 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Firth & Firth*, Foster J considered an application for interim property orders, an application for an injunction, and an application for disclosure orders. The wife sought various orders, including an injunction and specific disclosure, while the husband sought interim property orders.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether to grant interim property orders, whether to grant an injunction sought by the wife, and whether to grant disclosure orders in light of an impending final hearing and the imminent release of a single expert report.

Foster J reasoned that an interim payment of $500,000 was appropriate to be made by the husband to the wife, reserving the characterisation of this sum to the final trial. However, the court refused the wife's application for an injunction. Furthermore, due to the proximity of the final hearing and the imminent release of a single expert report, the court declined to make orders for the particular disclosure sought by the wife.

Consequently, the court ordered the husband to pay $500,000 to the wife within 14 days, with the characterisation of this sum reserved. The wife's application in a case, as amended, was otherwise dismissed, as was the husband's response. Applications for costs were to be made by written submission within one month, with responses due within a further 14 days, and judgment on costs reserved to chambers.

Orders

Orders of the court

That within 14 days from this date the husband cause to be paid to the wife or as she may otherwise direct in writing the sum of $500,000 with the characterisation of such sum reserved to final trial.

That, otherwise, the Application in a Case filed by the wife on 30 March 2020 as amended be dismissed.

That, otherwise, the Response by the husband filed 6 May 2020 to the wife’s Application in a Case be dismissed.

That any application for costs arising from these orders be made by way of written submission filed and served within one month from this date with any submissions in response thereto to be filed and served within a further 14 days and that thereafter judgment as to costs reserved to chambers.

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.