Jabbar and Gade (No. 2) - [2018] FamCAFC 154

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

JABBAR & GADE (NO. 2)

[2018] FamCAFC 154

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – APPLICATION IN AN APPEAL – EXPEDITION – Where there are a number of appeals on foot relating to the same factual history – Where the most efficient use of resources would be to consolidate the appeals – Where the applicant’s substantive appeal is against final parenting and property settlement orders – Where the applicant appeals against orders dismissing a stay application – Expedition not opposed – Where expedition is the most efficient use of the parties’ and the court’s resources – Order made consolidating appeals – Application for expedition granted.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT:

Ms Jabbar

RESPONDENT:	Mr Gade
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER:	Legal Aid NSW

FILE NUMBER:

NCC

2265

2015

APPEAL NUMBER:

2018

DATE DELIVERED:

8 August 2018

PLACE DELIVERED:

Sydney

PLACE HEARD:

Sydney

JUDGMENT OF:

Ryan J

HEARING DATE:

8 August 2018

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:

Federal Circuit Court of Australia

LOWER COURT JUDGMENT DATE:

2 July 2018

LOWER COURT MNC:

[2018] FCCA 2041

REPRESENTATION

THE APPLICANT:

In person

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT:	Mr Bithrey
SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:	NLS Law

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’ S LAWYER:

Legal Aid NSW

Orders

Appeals EA 71 of 2018 and EA 91 of 2018 be consolidated.
Appeals EA 71 of 2018 and EA 91 of 2018 be expedited.
The Registrar is directed to conduct a procedural hearing in relation to appeal EA 91 of 2018 as soon as practicable.
In the event there is a full trial transcript in relation to appeal EA 71 of 2018, the registrar is requested to notify the parties accordingly and, if it is agreed, to include those additional days of transcript as may be required in the electronic transcript for the appeal.
The costs of this application to be costs in the stay appeal (EA 91 of 2018).

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Jabbar & Gade (No. 2) has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

THE APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY

Appeal Number: EA 91 of 2018
File Number: NCC 2265 of 2015

Ms Jabbar

Applicant

And

Mr Gade

Respondent

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

By an Application in an Appeal filed on 6 July 2018, Ms Jabbar (“the applicant”) seeks an order that her appeal against the dismissal of interim parenting and stay of orders applications made by Judge Terry on 2 July 2018 be expedited. Those orders were made in…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Jabbar and Gade (No. 2)

Details

AGLC: Jabbar and Gade (No. 2) [2018] FamCAFC 154
Case: [2018] FamCAFC 154
Decision Date: 8 August 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in the consolidated appeals were Jabbar and Gade, who appeared before the Court. The primary dispute centred around the procedural and substantive aspects of the appeals. The appeals were heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The court needed to decide on several legal issues, including the consolidation of the appeals, the expediency of the proceedings, and the necessity for a procedural hearing in one of the appeals. Additionally, the court considered the availability of a full trial transcript for one of the appeals and the associated costs.

The court decided that the two appeals should be consolidated for efficiency and to avoid duplication of efforts. It also ordered that the appeals be expedited to ensure a timely resolution. The court recognised the importance of a procedural hearing in one of the appeals to ensure that the proceedings adhered to the appropriate legal standards. Furthermore, the court addressed the issue of the trial transcript, requesting that the registrar notify the parties of its availability and to include it in the electronic transcript if agreed upon. Finally, the court determined that the costs of the application should be borne by the party responsible for the stay appeal.

In summary, the court's orders consolidated and expedited the appeals, mandated a procedural hearing, considered the availability of a full trial transcript, and allocated the costs of the application. These orders were subject to formal entry in the court's records.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeals EA 71 of 2018 and EA 91 of 2018 be consolidated.

Appeals EA 71 of 2018 and EA 91 of 2018 be expedited.

The Registrar is directed to conduct a procedural hearing in relation to appeal EA 91 of 2018 as soon as practicable.

In the event there is a full trial transcript in relation to appeal EA 71 of 2018, the registrar is requested to notify the parties accordingly and, if it is agreed, to include those additional days of transcript as may be required in the electronic transcript for the appeal.

The costs of this application to be costs in the stay appeal (EA 91 of 2018).

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

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.