FORSTER & BECKETT - [2015] FamCA 140

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FORSTER & BECKETT

[2015] FamCA 140

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where proceedings were transferred to the Family Court from the Federal Circuit Court pursuant to rule 8.02 of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 – Where Court considered the protocol for guidance as to which court matters should be commenced – Where Court noted the protocol is an administrative agreement between both jurisdictions and as such, cannot fetter the discretion of either court to transfer proceedings to the other – Where Court considered statutory mandatory considerations to have regard to and that may inform the exercise of discretion – Where Court considered whether or not the matter should be transferred back to the Federal Circuit Court pursuant to section 33B of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where no reasons were delivered for the transfer of the matter to the Family Court – Where Court noted that the reasons to transfer to the Family Court would be a matter relevant to have regard to in determining whether or not to exercise discretion under s 33B Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where it appears that matter which informed the Judge’s discretion to transfer the matter was the it was likely to take in excess of four days of hearing time – Where both solicitors agree that the matter would take three days, with the prospect of a fourth, but where neither asserted it would take in excess of four days – Where Court satisfied that the resources of the Federal Circuit Court in Cairns are sufficient to hear and determine the proceeding – Where Court satisfied that the interests of the administration and justice are best served by transferring the matter, which has no basis to be in the Family Court – Where the Court noted that the balancing other factors confirms and compels the transfer of the matter – Where order made transferring the matter to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 33B
Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (Cth) s 39
Family Law Rules rr 11.17, 11.18
Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 r 8.02

Fair Work Ombudsman v Ecosway Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 102
Summers & Shaw [2011] FamCA 889
Nemeck & Jump [2010] FamCA 1102
Re W: Publication Application (1997) 137FLR 205
Soulemezis v Dudley Holdings (1987) 10 NSWLR 247

APPLICANT:

Ms Forster

RESPONDENT:

Mr Beckett

FILE NUMBER:

CSC

526

2014

DATE DELIVERED:

10 March 2015

PLACE DELIVERED:

Townsville

PLACE HEARD:

Townsville

JUDGMENT OF:

Tree J

HEARING DATE:

5 March 2015

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITORS FOR THE APPLICANT:

Roberts Family Law

SOLICITORS FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Hadley Family Law

Orders

Pursuant to s 33B(1) and s 33B(2)(b) of the Family Law Act, these proceedings be transferred to the Federal Circuit Court at Cairns to be listed on a date fixed by that court.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Forster & Beckett has been…

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 FORSTER & BECKETT

Details

AGLC: FORSTER & BECKETT [2015] FamCA 140
Case: [2015] FamCA 140
Decision Date: 10 March 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The proceedings involved Forster & Beckett, with the court being the Family Court of Australia, presided over by Tree J. The nature of the dispute is not detailed in the provided text, beyond the fact that it was a matter within the jurisdiction of the Family Court.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the proceedings should be transferred to the Federal Circuit Court at Cairns. This determination was made pursuant to specific provisions of the *Family Law Act*, namely section 33B(1) and section 33B(2)(b).

Tree J ordered that the proceedings be transferred to the Federal Circuit Court at Cairns. The case was to be listed for hearing on a date to be fixed by that court, indicating a procedural step rather than a final determination on the merits of the underlying dispute.

Orders

Orders of the court

Pursuant to s 33B(1) and s 33B(2)(b) of the Family Law Act, these proceedings be transferred to the Federal Circuit Court at Cairns to be listed on a date fixed by that court.

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.