FOLEY & FOLEY

Foley & Foley involved an appeal against the orders made by Benjamin J on 21 December 2017 and subsequently remade on 14 February 2018. The appellant attempted to file a late Application in an Appeal, seeking to incorporate challenges to a separate costs decision in an Amended Notice of Appeal. The Appeals Registry rejected this document, citing the appellant's failure to adhere to the proper procedures outlined in s 94 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) and r 22.03 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth). Additionally, the appellant's senior counsel was informed that two sets of orders could not be appealed using one Notice of Appeal. Senior counsel conceded that the Application should be dismissed. Consequently, the Application in an Appeal was dismissed.

The court also addressed the appellant's request to rely on an Amended Summary of Appeal. The grounds in the Notice of Appeal and the Amended Summary of Appeal were difficult to reconcile and did not comply with Practice Direction No. 1 of 2017 or r 22.22 of the Family Law Rules. Despite these deficiencies, the appellant was permitted to rely on the Amended Summary of Argument with the respondent's consent, as the appellant had ample time to file an Amended Notice of Appeal and was bound by the grounds in the original Notice of Appeal.

In the substantive appeal, each ground pressed on appeal asserted a discretionary error made by the primary judge. The court held that these grounds of appeal had a high bar to meet in order to warrant appellant intervention. The court examined various issues, including the valuation of a company, the value attributed to furniture and contents, the health of the children, the appellant's conduct regarding the company, and the respondent's standard of living. The court found no error in the primary judge's determinations, and thus the appeal was dismissed.

The parties were directed to file written submissions relating to the costs of the appeal within 28 days of the delivery of the judgment. The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.