Jandro & Waisner

Link copied
Case Copied 28 min read

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

(DIVISION 2)

Jandro & Waisner [2024] FedCFamC2F 270

File number(s): ADC 1250 of 2022
Judgment of: JUDGE MCGINN
Date of judgment: 1 March 2024 
Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – SINGLE EXPERT WITNESS – application for removal – earlier valuation for third party bank – independence of single expert– duties – non-disclosure of earlier valuation – materiality – selection of single expert – remediation if non-disclosure - application disallowed
Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021

Cases cited:

Henderson v Amadio [1995] FCA 1300; (1995) 62 FCR 1

Voli v Inglewood [1963] HCA 15; (1963) 110 CLR 74 at 79

Division: Division 2 Family Law
Number of paragraphs: 130
Date of hearing: 27 February 2024
Place: Adelaide
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Richards
Solicitor for the Applicant: Howe Jenkins
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Lindsay
Solicitor for the Respondent: Gillian Marks & Company

ORDERS

ADC 1250 of 2022

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MS JANDRO

Applicant

AND:

MR WAISNER

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE MCGINN

DATE OF ORDER:

1 MARCH 2024

IT IS ORDERED:

1.That the Application in a Proceeding filed 1 December 2023 and sealed 5 December 2023 do stand dismissed.

2.That each party bear their own costs of and incidental to the said Application.

3.That the Application in a proceeding sealed 1 June 2023 do stand dismissed.

4.That this matter stand adjourned to 9:30 am on 30 May 2024 for trial directions.

5.There be liberty to the parties to apply by way of joint correspondence to the Associate to Judge McGinn to seek to vary the date and time of the hearing referred to in order 3.

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

JUDGE McGINN:

  1. The applicant de facto wife’s Application in a Proceeding filed 1 December 2023 and sealed 5 December 2023 came before the Court for oral submissions on 27 February 2023.

  2. By that Application the wife seeks:

    (a)the discharge of orders made 16 May 2023 as to the appointment of a Mr B as single valuer to value the respondent’s real estate, plant and equipment;

    (b)for the respondent de facto husband…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Jandro & Waisner and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2024] FedCFamC2F 270
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) dealt with an application by Ms Jandro to remove the single expert witness appointed in her family law proceedings against Mr Waisner. The application was based on concerns about the independence and impartiality of the expert due to the expert's previous valuation work for a third-party bank. Ms Jandro argued that the expert's prior valuation, which was not disclosed, was material to the current proceedings. The court was tasked with deciding whether the expert's past work affected their ability to provide an unbiased opinion in the current case, and if there was any non-disclosure of material facts that would warrant the expert's removal.

Judge McGinn considered the duties and responsibilities of the single expert, including the need for independence and the obligation to disclose any prior work that could impact their objectivity. The court examined whether the expert's previous valuation for the bank was material and if its non-disclosure warranted the removal of the expert. Judge McGinn also assessed the process for selecting a single expert and potential remedies if non-disclosure was established. Ultimately, the court concluded that the non-disclosure did not prejudice the expert's ability to act impartially and dismissed the application for removal.

In light of the findings, the court dismissed the application for the removal of the single expert and ordered each party to bear their own costs of the application. The matter was adjourned for trial directions, with liberty granted for the parties to apply for a variation of the hearing date and time. This decision underscores the importance of transparency and impartiality in the appointment and conduct of single expert witnesses in family law proceedings.

Orders

Orders of the court

ADC 1250 of 2022

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MS JANDRO

Applicant

AND:

MR WAISNER

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE MCGINN

DATE OF ORDER:

1 MARCH 2024

IT IS ORDERED:

1. That the Application in a Proceeding filed 1 December 2023 and sealed 5 December 2023 do stand dismissed.

2. That each party bear their own costs of and incidental to the said Application.

3. That the Application in a proceeding sealed 1 June 2023 do stand dismissed.

4. That this matter stand adjourned to 9:30 am on 30 May 2024 for trial directions.

5. There be liberty to the parties to apply by way of joint correspondence to the Associate to Judge McGinn to seek to vary the date and time of the hearing referred to in order 3.

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.

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.