INNA & ABDU LOFTEN

The parties to these proceedings are the applicant wife, Ms Inna, and the respondent husband, Mr Abdu Loften. The dispute concerns an application for divorce filed by the wife on 30 May 2014, which the husband had initially contested by filing a response that raised controversy regarding the date of separation. The matter was before Judge Harman in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the court was the determination of the date of separation of the parties, which was a factual matter that had been raised in the husband's response to the divorce application. This controversy arose despite the wife's assertion of separation on 11 April 2013 in her divorce application, and her subsequent affidavits in related substantive proceedings referring to separation occurring "in or about 2009". The court also considered the transfer of the divorce proceedings.

Judge Harman noted that the husband did not appear at the hearing. The court observed that the husband's initial response had contested jurisdiction or at least the delegated jurisdiction of the Sessional Registrar, and had significantly put the date of separation into issue. The court was advised that the wife could provide oral evidence to explain the discrepancy in the dates of separation, suggesting she may have had an imperfect understanding of the legal meaning of "date of separation" when she self-represented and completed the divorce application. Given the extant proceedings before the Family Court of Australia, the court determined that the divorce application should be transferred to the Family Court for consolidation with those proceedings, subject to the discretion of Justice Hannam.

The court ordered the husband to pay the wife's costs of and incidental to the listing in the sum of $4,250, payable within 28 days. The order further stipulated that if payment was not made within that period, the wife would be entitled to interest, and could commence proceedings for recovery of the sum and any accrued interest. This sum and interest were also to be a charge upon the husband's interest in property subject to ongoing property adjustment proceedings, payable upon their conclusion.