Garvey & Jess

[2021] FamCA 102

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Garvey & Jess [2021] FamCA 102

File number(s):

BRC 2175 of 2016

Judgment of:

BAUMANN J

Date of judgment:

12 March 2021

Catchwords:

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the issues for determination were alleged non-compliance in respect of disclosure; extent of disclosure relating to third parties; what property needs to be valued and how the costs should be shared initially, appointment of an accountant and what trial directions should be made – Orders made for the parties to circulate minutes of proposed orders consistent with these Reasons

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 79

Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) rr 13.01, 13.02(2), 17.02

Cases cited:

Number of paragraphs:

58

Date of hearing:

8 July 2020

Place:

Brisbane

Counsel for the Applicant:

Mr P Hackett

Solicitor for the Applicant:

Hirst & Co

Counsel for the First Respondent:

Mr T Kirk QC

Solicitor for the First Respondent:

Barry Nilsson Lawyers

Counsel for the Second Respondents:

Mr G Richardson SC

Solicitor for the Second Respondents:

Mills Oakley Lawyers

ORDERS

BRC 2175 of 2016

BETWEEN:

MS JESS

Applicant

AND:

MR GARVEY

First Respondent

Mr Z GARVEY AND Mr Z GARVEY AS CASE GUARDIAN FOR Ms GARVEY

Second Respondents

ORDER MADE BY:	BAUMANN J
DATE OF ORDER:	12 March 2021

THE COURT ORDERS:

1.That the Applicant shall within fourteen (14) days circulate to the other parties a minute of order consistent with the Reasons for Judgment delivered 12 March 2021.

2.That the Respondents shall within seven (7) days of receipt of the said minute of order provide their written response.

3.That these proceedings be adjourned for Case Management Hearing for pronouncement of orders and directions for an allocated trial date, at 11.00am on … April 2021 in the Family Court of Australia at Brisbane.

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

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 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

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

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

BAUMANN J:

INTRODUCTION

1. In March 2016 the husband Mr Garvey filed an Application seeking enforcement of a financial agreement dated 3 August 2006 which he asserted was binding upon the parties.  The wife Ms Jess claimed the said financial agreement was not binding upon the parties.  In respect of that core issue:

   (a)on 3 August 2017 Carew J dismissed the wife’s Application for the financial agreement to be found “not binding, enforceable or effective”;

   (b)the Orders of Carew J were the subject of an unsuccessful Appeal (dismissed 18 March 2018) and an unsuccessful Application to the High Court for special leave;

   (c)on 9…