Grierson and Grierson (No. 2)

[2009] FamCA 296

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GRIERSON & GRIERSON (NO. 2) [2009] FamCA 296

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Consent orders

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Mr Grierson

RESPONDENT: Ms Grierson

FILE NUMBER: MLC 10817 of 2007

DATE DELIVERED: 17 April 2009

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Cronin J

HEARING DATE: 17 April 2009

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Fookes

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Ronald Segal & Associates

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Mulvany as case guardian

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT Jeanne Gorman

Orders

1. That BY CONSENT there be orders in accordance with the minutes of proposed orders marked Exhibit “A” sealed and attached hereto AND IT IS DIRECTED that such minutes remain upon the Court file.

2. That the solicitor for the husband engross the minutes and deliver them by electronic transmission to my Associate within 7 days.

3. That my reasons for judgment this day be transcribed and be made available to the parties.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Grierson & Grierson is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER:  MLC 10817 of 2007

MR GRIERSON

Applicant

And

MS GRIERSON

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. These are proceedings between the husband and wife which have been described by Mr Mulvany as the case guardian, as tragic.  I could not agree more.  On 16 February this year, I made an order and gave some reasons.  In those orders, I appointed Mr Mulvany as the case guardian for the wife.

2. This was a relatively short marriage but with a very tragic history which resulted in the wife being sentenced to a lengthy term of imprisonment as a result of her actions.

3. I have been handed a statement which I will mark as exhibit W1, handwritten by the wife, in which it is quite clear she says she has no memory of what occurred and goes on then to say some things which quite frankly are irrelevant to the decision I have to make.  She signs off that missive with the words that she remains in God's hand.  Unfortunately, there is little I can do in relation to that.

4. The object of Mr Mulvany's appointment was to assist the parties in being able to conclude what is a very difficult property dispute, having regard to the actions of the wife.  The husband had quite substantial assets prior to, as I said, the very short marriage.  He is now left with considerably less.

5. Having had the opportunity to have a look at the file and have some considerable involvement in it last year and again earlier this year, I am satisfied that the decision made by Mr Mulvany on behalf of the wife is a proper one and I am satisfied that in all the circumstances, the outcome of these proceedings are just and equitable.

6. I will mark as Exhibit A the minutes of consent orders and as I indicated, I will mark the statement of the wife as exhibit W1.

I certify that the preceding Six (6) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Cronin 

Associate: 

Date:  22 April 2009