Fitrakis and Kouretas
[2008] FamCAFC 183
•20 October 2008
FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| FITRAKIS & KOURETAS | [2008] FamCAFC 183 |
| FAMILY LAW - APPEAL from decision of a Federal Magistrate – Incorrect use of appeal process - Appellant seeking to appeal findings and not to disturb orders – appeal dismissed. |
| Family Law Act 1975 |
| APPELLANT: | Mr Fitrakis |
| RESPONDENT: | Ms Kouretas |
| FILE NUMBER: | MLC | 2706 | of | 2008 |
| APPEAL NUMBER: | SA | 68 | of | 2008 |
| DATE DELIVERED: | 20 October 2008 |
| PLACE DELIVERED: | Melbourne |
| PLACE HEARD: | Melbourne |
| JUDGMENT OF: | Mushin J |
| HEARING DATE: | 20 October 2008 |
| LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: | Federal Magistrates Court |
| LOWER COURT JUDGMENT DATE: | 25 July 2008 |
| LOWER COURT MNC: | [2008] FMCAfam 738 |
REPRESENTATION
| COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT: | N/A |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE APPELLANT: | In person |
| COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: | N/A |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: | No appearance |
Orders
On the matter of Fitrakis and Kouretas, SA68 of 2008 from MLC 2706 of 2008, I order that the father's appeal filed on 20 August 2008 be dismissed.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Fitrakis & Kouretas is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
| FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE |
APPEAL NUMBER: SA68 of 2008
FILE NUMBER: MLC 2706 of 2008
| Mr Fitrakis |
Appellant
And
| Ms Kouretas |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
On 27 June 2008 Burchardt FM heard proceedings between the parties relating to their children who are the issue of a marriage of some five-and-half years.
Final parenting parenting orders had been made by consent on 21 November 2007 by Hughes FM and the subject orders were a result of an application by the mother seeking a variation.
On 25 July 2008, Burchardt FM delivered reasons for judgment and made certain orders setting aside the earlier orders providing for the children to live in the primary care of the mother, equal-shared parental responsibility and further orders whereby the father was able to spend time with the children as specified and as is not presently relevant.
The father has, by notice of appeal, sought to challenge the findings which his Honour made but does not seek to challenge the orders which his Honour made.
The father has not advanced any argument against the proposition that an appeal of this type is an appeal not against findings but against orders and has ultimately accepted that because of the nature of the appeal it should be dismissed.
I will order accordingly.
I certify that the preceding six (6) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Mushin
Associate:
Date: 20 November 2008
0
0
1