Jarratt & Eastmond - [2024] FedCFamC2F 850

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Jarratt & Eastmond [2024] FedCFamC2F 850

File number(s): NCC 2802 of 2023

Judgment of: JUDGE GLASS

Date of judgment: 14 June 2024

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – oral reasons – where contraventions established – where primary orders are eight years old – where consequential relief sought is inappropriate

Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 70NAC, 70NAE

Cases cited:
Behn & Ziomek [2015] FamCA 1185

Elspeth & Peter; Mark & Peter and John & Peter [2007] FamCA 655

Harvey & Harvey [2018] FamCA 516

Manolis & Manolis [2022] FedCFamC1F 443

Stavros & Stavros (1984) FLC 91-562

Division: Division 2 Family Law

Number of paragraphs: 40

Date of hearing: 11 June 2024

Place: Melbourne

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Allen

Solicitor for the Applicant: Koulouris & Associates

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Myles

Solicitor for the Respondent: Victoria Legal Aid
ORDERS

NCC 2802 of 2023

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:
MS JARRATT

Applicant

AND:
MR EASTMOND

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE GLASS

DATE OF ORDER:

14 JUNE 2024

UPON THE COURT FINDING THAT:
A.The Respondent contravened parenting orders made 28 April 2016 on five occasions in July and August 2023.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The Contravention Application filed 8 September 2023 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).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of 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 subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
JUDGE GLASS:

By way of application filed on 8 September 2023, Ms Jarratt alleges that Mr Eastmond has contravened parenting Orders made 28 April 2016 in relation to their son, X, who will turn 16 this year, on five occasions. Other counts pleaded in the application were struck out by Order dated 17 November 2023 or withdrawn at the commencement of the hearing.
Ms Jarratt alleges contravention of Orders that provide for X to spend time with his father during school terms on alternate weekends from after school Thursday until before school Monday and after school Thursday until before school Friday in the alternate week. X is to otherwise live with Ms Jarratt.
Mr Eastmond denies the allegations. Alternatively, he contends that he has a reasonable excuse for the contraventions.
CONTRAVENTIONS
It is common ground that the application falls to be determined…

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 Jarratt & Eastmond

Details

AGLC: Jarratt & Eastmond [2024] FedCFamC2F 850
Case: [2024] FedCFamC2F 850
Decision Date: 14 June 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter of Jarratt & Eastmond involved a dispute concerning contraventions of parenting orders. Ms Jarratt, the applicant, sought relief against Mr Eastmond, the respondent, for breaches of parenting orders made in 2016. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, Division 2, presided over the case. The court was tasked with determining whether Mr Eastmond contravened the existing parenting orders on five occasions in July and August 2023, as alleged by Ms Jarratt. Additionally, the court had to decide whether any consequential relief was appropriate in light of the findings.

The court found that Mr Eastmond had indeed contravened the parenting orders on five occasions. However, the court also noted that the primary orders in question were eight years old, and that any sought consequential relief was not appropriate. The court's reasoning focused on the age of the orders and the nature of the relief requested. Given the length of time since the original orders were made and the nature of the relief sought, the court concluded that dismissing the contravention application was the most appropriate course of action.

As a result of the court's findings, the contravention application filed by Ms Jarratt on 8 September 2023 was dismissed. The court's order, dated 14 June 2024, reflects this decision. The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records, and any minor typographical or grammatical errors may be subject to review or variation.

Orders

Orders of the court

NCC 2802 of 2023

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MS JARRATT

Applicant

AND:

MR EASTMOND

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE GLASS

DATE OF ORDER:

14 JUNE 2024

UPON THE COURT FINDING THAT:

A. The Respondent contravened parenting orders made 28 April 2016 on five occasions in July and August 2023.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The Contravention Application filed 8 September 2023 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).

Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of 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.

File number(s):	NCC 2802 of 2023
Judgment of:	JUDGE GLASS
Date of judgment:	14 June 2024
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – CONTRAVENTION – oral reasons – where contraventions established – where primary orders are eight years old – where consequential relief sought is inappropriate
Legislation:	Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 70NAC, 70NAE
Cases cited:	Behn & Ziomek [2015] FamCA 1185 Elspeth & Peter; Mark & Peter and John & Peter [2007] FamCA 655 Harvey & Harvey [2018] FamCA 516 Manolis & Manolis [2022] FedCFamC1F 443 Stavros & Stavros (1984) FLC 91-562
Division:	Division 2 Family Law
Number of paragraphs:	40
Date of hearing:	11 June 2024
Place:	Melbourne
Counsel for the Applicant:	Mr Allen
Solicitor for the Applicant:	Koulouris & Associates
Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr Myles
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Victoria Legal Aid

NCC 2802 of 2023
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:	MS JARRATT Applicant
AND:	MR EASTMOND Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	JUDGE GLASS
DATE OF ORDER:	14 JUNE 2024