FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Glos & Glos (No 4) [2025] FedCFamC1F 318
File number(s): BRC 1128 of 2023 Judgment of: HOWARD J Date of judgment: 15 May 2025 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW - PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where the husband seeks that the wife’s lawyers be restrained from acting for the wife – where documents belonging to the husband and subject to legal professional privilege were improperly accessed by the wife – where information from those documents was utilised by the wife against the husband in the financial proceedings – where orders are made restraining the wife’s lawyers from acting on behalf of the wife Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) Cases cited: Crittenden & Collins [2017] FamCA 716
Mallesons Stephen Jaques v KPMG Peat Marwick (1990) 4 WAR 357
Venter & Venter (No 6) (2024) 69 Fam LR 345
Division: Division 1 First Instance Number of paragraphs: 38 Date of hearing: 6 May 2025 and 12 May 2025 Place: Brisbane Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Richardson SC Solicitor for the Applicant: Mills Oakley Lawyers Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Atkinson KC Solicitor for the Respondent: Hopgood Ganim Lawyers ORDERS
BRC 1128 of 2023 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MR GLOS
Applicant
AND: MS GLOS
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
HOWARD J
DATE OF ORDER:
15 MAY 2025
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The respondent, Ms Glos (“the respondent”), is restrained from further engaging or instructing any of the following legal firms or legal practitioners in respect of the proceedings in the subject matter number BRC1128/2023:
(a)Hopgood Ganim Lawyers;
(b)Mr M of Counsel; and
(c)Any other Counsel briefed on her behalf since 29 September 2024.
2.The respondent is restrained from discussing or communicating to any other person the contents of any of the documents in the property located at B Street, Town C, NSW accessed by her (Town C documents) other than those documents already disclosed by the applicant in these proceedings.
3.The Respondent is restrained from making any use for the purpose of these proceedings of any information derived from the Town C documents other than those documents already disclosed by the applicant in these proceedings.
4.To the extent not already destroyed by the respondent and her agents by or at the direction of the respondent, the respondent shall forthwith destroy all hard copies and electronic copies of the Town C documents within her possession or control (include any copies held in cloud storage) and direct any of her agents or legal representatives (including previous legal representatives) to also do so and confirm in writing to the lawyers for the applicant when the same has been done.
5.Any costs application must be filed and served within 14 days.
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 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and…
Continue reading Glos & Glos (No 4)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Glos & Glos (No 4) [2025] FedCFamC1F 318
- Case
- [2025] FedCFamC1F 318
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether the applicant had a legitimate basis to seek the restraining of the respondent's legal team due to the improper access and use of privileged documents. It was also necessary to assess whether the respondent should be restrained from further discussing or using the contents of these documents in the proceedings. The court had to consider the principles of legal professional privilege, the conduct of the parties, and the appropriate remedies to ensure fairness and protect the integrity of the legal process.
In its reasoning, the court recognised the seriousness of the respondent's actions in accessing and using privileged documents. It found that the respondent's conduct warranted the imposition of restraints to prevent further misuse of the privileged information. Consequently, the court made orders to restrain the respondent from engaging the specified legal firms and practitioners, discussing or communicating the contents of the privileged documents, and using any information derived from those documents in the proceedings. The court also ordered the respondent to destroy any copies of the documents in her possession or control and to confirm the destruction in writing to the applicant's lawyers.
The court's orders were designed to address the respondent's improper conduct and to safeguard the legal process. The final orders restrained the respondent from engaging certain legal representatives, using privileged information, and communicating the contents of the documents, while also requiring the destruction of any copies of the documents in her possession. The court emphasised the importance of maintaining the integrity of legal professional privilege and ensuring that parties adhere to the rules governing family law proceedings.
Orders
Orders of the court
BRC 1128 of 2023
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN:
MR GLOS
Applicant
AND:
MS GLOS
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
HOWARD J
DATE OF ORDER:
15 MAY 2025
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The respondent, Ms Glos (“the respondent”), is restrained from further engaging or instructing any of the following legal firms or legal practitioners in respect of the proceedings in the subject matter number BRC1128/2023:
(a) Hopgood Ganim Lawyers;
(b) Mr M of Counsel; and
(c) Any other Counsel briefed on her behalf since 29 September 2024.
2. The respondent is restrained from discussing or communicating to any other person the contents of any of the documents in the property located at B Street, Town C, NSW accessed by her (Town C documents) other than those documents already disclosed by the applicant in these proceedings.
3. The Respondent is restrained from making any use for the purpose of these proceedings of any information derived from the Town C documents other than those documents already disclosed by the applicant in these proceedings.
4. To the extent not already destroyed by the respondent and her agents by or at the direction of the respondent, the respondent shall forthwith destroy all hard copies and electronic copies of the Town C documents within her possession or control (include any copies held in cloud storage) and direct any of her agents or legal representatives (including previous legal representatives) to also do so and confirm in writing to the lawyers for the applicant when the same has been done.
5. Any costs application must be filed and served within 14 days.
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 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
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.