HUDSON & HUDSON

[2015] FCCA 2670

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

HUDSON & HUDSON [2015] FCCA 2670

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Practice and procedure – transfer to Family Court of Australia.

Legislation:

Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (Cth), ss.39, 39(6)
Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth), r.8.02

Applicant: MR HUDSON

Respondent: MS HUDSON

File Number: MLC 5693 of 2014

Judgment of: Judge Hartnett

Hearing date: 28 September 2015

Delivered at: Melbourne

Delivered on: 28 September 2015

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Ms Wheeler

Solicitors for the Applicant: Cahill & Rowe Family Law

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Ambrose

Solicitors for the Respondent: Harwood Andrews

ORDERS

1. Pursuant to s.39 of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (Cth), these proceedings be transferred to the Melbourne Registry of the Family Court of Australia to be listed on a date to be advised.

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT MELBOURNE

MLC 5693 of 2014

MR HUDSON

Applicant

And

MS HUDSON

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Edited ex tempore reasons)

1. These proceedings commenced on 30 June 2014. They were listed for a three day final hearing on 28 September 2015. Counsel for the parties advised this day that the matter will now take five days. Counsel for the Applicant husband also sought an adjournment of the proceedings on the basis of the recent filing of materials and broadening of the proceedings by the wife. The matter cannot be reached this day given the commencement of another. There is no prospect of a five day matter being heard in this Court within 12 months. The resources of this Court simply cannot accommodate such a matter.

2. The elongation of the proceedings is resultant upon the Applicant filing an Amended Application on 3 September 2015 which was met by an Amended Response filed by the Respondent wife on 17 September 2015. Annexure “A” to that Amended Response is a Statement of Claim seeking damages and costs in respect of alleged physical, verbal and psychological abuse said to be perpetrated upon the wife by the husband. Such claim is additional and reliant on the accrued jurisdiction of the Court.

3. Section 39 of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (Cth) and r.8.02 of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 (Cth) govern the Court’s consideration of the matter. The transfer of proceedings is occurring on the Court’s own initiative. I note an appeal does not lie from this decision to transfer.[1] It is in the interests of the administration of justice for this matter to be heard in a timely manner. That cannot occur in this Court, in particular in this Registry of the Court, with its current resources. Whilst the cost to the parties may increase as a result of the transfer to the superior court, they equally may not.

   [1] Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (Cth), s.39(6).

4. The proceedings themselves contain elements suitable for hearing by the Family Court of Australia, in particular the exercising of an accrued jurisdiction.

I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Hartnett

Associate: 

Date:  29 September 2015