Grigorov & Grigorov
[2023] FedCFamC1F 1103
•19 December 2023
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
FIRST INSTANCE
Grigorov & Grigorov [2023] FedCFamC1F 1103
File number(s): LEC 479 of 2022 Judgment of: CAREW J Date of judgment: 19 December 2023 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – MAINTENANCE – Where the applicant sought that an overseas order for spouse and child maintenance be discharged – Where the overseas maintenance order was registered with the Child Support Agency and the Child Support Registrar intervened – Where the applicant died before the application was heard – Where death is a terminating factor – Application dismissed. Legislation: Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth)
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
Family Law Regulations 1984 (Cth)
Number of paragraphs: 14 Date of last submission/s: 15 November 2023 Date of hearing: Heard in Chambers Place: Brisbane Solicitor for the Applicant: Family Law Solutions Solicitor for the Respondent: HHG Legal Group Counsel for the Intervenor: Mr C Bishop Solicitor the Intervenor: Australian Government Solicitor ORDER
LEC 479 of 2022 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MR GRIGOROV (DECEASED)
Applicant
AND: MS GRIGOROV
Respondent
CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR
Intervenor
ORDER MADE BY:
CAREW J
DATE OF ORDER:
19 DECEMBER 2023
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The Initiating Application filed on 22 August 2022 is dismissed.
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).
Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under a pseudonym has been approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
CAREW J:
On 22 August 2022, the applicant commenced proceedings to discharge an order made for spouse and child maintenance by the District Court of Country B in 2009 and for the discharge to be backdated to 20 July 2021. The applicant died in 2023 before his application could be heard. As there is no provision in the relevant legislation enabling his application to continue upon his death, it will be dismissed.
It is perhaps of assistance to provide some brief background to the matter in circumstances where the respondent, who has taken no active part in the proceedings, nevertheless apparently opposes the dismissal of the application. The intervenor is the Child Support Registrar who indirectly represents the respondent’s interests. Submissions have been received from the solicitors for the applicant (now deceased) and the intervenor supporting the dismissal of the application and requesting that the matter be determined in Chambers.
BACKGROUND
The applicant, Mr Grigorov, was born in 1949 and died in Australia in 2023. Until shortly before his death, the applicant worked as a health professional. At the time of commencing these proceedings, the applicant was living in Australia and was an Australian citizen.
The respondent, Ms Grigorov, is of an unknown age. The respondent currently resides in the United States of America.
The parties were married in 2001 and divorced in 2006.
The proceedings relate to a child support claim for the now adult child, namely, Ms X born 1997.
The parties’ dispute has been long-running and taken place across many jurisdictions.
In 2009, a final order was made in relation to spouse and child support by the District Court of Country B (“the 2009 order”). The applicant was ordered to pay the respondent US$2,000 per month in spouse maintenance and US$1,000 per month in child support for Ms X commencing from 1 January 2009. Spouse maintenance payments were to continue until the respondent remarried or died and child support was to continue until the child turned 18 years or age or completed full-time education.
At some point between 2009 and 2016, the respondent moved to the United States of America.
It seems that since about 2019, at least, the respondent had been attempting to recover arrears of maintenance from the applicant. There were difficulties with that process which are not relevant for present purposes.
In or about March 2022, the respondent registered the 2009 order for collection with the intervenor pursuant to the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth). Under that Act, the death of the “payer”, (in this case the applicant), is a “terminating event” i.e. the ability to collect maintenance payments ceased upon the death of the applicant.
DISPOSITION
Section 110 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”) provides that regulations may be made that would, relevantly, enable this Court to make orders for the “variation, discharge, suspension or revival of maintenance orders registered in accordance with regulations under this section”. Regulation 36 of the Family Law Regulations 1984 (Cth) relevantly provides that an application of the type envisaged by s 110 for the variation, discharge, suspension of a registrable overseas maintenance liability can be made by the person against whom an order is made.
Unlike s 79(8) of the Act, which relates to property settlement proceedings, there is no provision for proceedings of the type that have been commenced in this case, to continue after the death of a party.
Accordingly, the application filed on 22 August 2022 will be dismissed.
I certify that the preceding fourteen (14) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Carew. Associate:
Dated: 19 December 2023
0
0
3