FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Julien & Perrin (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1F 50
File number(s): SYC 8105 of 2022 Judgment of: HARPER J Date of judgment: 6 February 2025 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the wife’s Application in a Proceeding seeks wide-ranging orders, primarily about disclosure – Extensive disclosure provided by the husband – Consideration of the overarching purpose and requirements of efficiency, timeliness, cost and proportionality confining the scope of arguments about disclosure – Rules about and obligations of disclosure generally not intended to place one party in a position to undertake an unreasonable, overly detailed, unnecessarily fastidious or obsessive audit of another party’s expenditure, dealings and transactions over many years – Where the evidence did not establish the husband’s existing disclosure was oppressive to the wife – Where some disclosure sought by the wife was not relevant to issues in the proceeding – Where the wife sought to discharge earlier court orders on the basis of non-compliance by the husband – Where the husband provided acceptable explanation for non-compliance – Husband granted an extension of time for compliance with orders – Application dismissed – All questions of costs reserved. Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) Pt VIIIAB, ss 4AA, 75, 79, 90SF, 90SM, 95, 96
Family Law Amendment Act2023 (Cth) Sch 5
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 (Cth) ss 67, 68
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) Ch 6, Pt 6.2, Div 6.2.4, rr 6.01, 6.02, 6.03, 6.04, 6.06, 6.09, 6.18
Cases cited: Hicks & Trustee of the Bankrupt Estate of Hicks (2021) FLC 94-006; [2021] FamCAFC 19
Julien & Perrin [2024] FedCFamC1F 265
Nagel & Clay (2020) 60 Fam LR 550; [2020] FamCA 326
Needham & Trustees of the Bankrupt Estate of Needham (2017) FLC 93–777; [2017] FamCAFC 94
Stopford Malloy & Malloy [2021] FedCFamC1F 123
Wei v Xia (No 5) (2023) 67 Fam LR 421; [2023] FedCFamC1F 679
Division: Division 1 First Instance Number of paragraphs: 41 Date of hearing: 30 January 2025 Place: Sydney Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Worth Solicitor for the Applicant: Milevski Family Lawyers Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Kearney SC and Ms Reid Solicitor for the Respondent: York Family Law Specialists ORDERS
SYC 8105 of 2022 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MS JULIEN
Applicant
AND: MR PERRIN
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
HARPER J
DATE OF ORDER:
6 FEBRUARY 2025
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The Application in a Proceeding filed on 13 August 2024 be dismissed, apart from questions of costs.
2.The time for compliance by the Respondent De Facto Husband (“husband”) with Order 1 made on 17 April 2024 be extended up to and including 2 September 2024.
3.With respect to Order 1 made on 17 April 2024:
(a)Within 72 hours of the making of these orders the Applicant De Facto Wife (“wife”) shall select in writing one of the proposed experts nominated by the husband on…
Continue reading Julien & Perrin (No 2)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Julien & Perrin (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1F 50
- Case
- [2025] FedCFamC1F 50
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court included the adequacy of the husband's disclosure in light of the wife's application, the relevance of some of the disclosure sought by the wife, and the justification for the husband's non-compliance with earlier orders. The court considered the overarching purpose and requirements of efficiency, timeliness, cost, and proportionality in the context of disclosure. It noted that the rules and obligations of disclosure were not intended to impose an unreasonable, overly detailed, or obsessive audit of another party's financial dealings. The court further assessed whether the husband's existing disclosure was oppressive to the wife and whether some of the disclosure sought by the wife was relevant to the issues in the proceeding.
Harper J found that the husband had provided acceptable explanations for non-compliance with earlier orders, and that the wife's application for discharge was unjustified. The court also concluded that the husband's disclosure was not oppressive and that some of the disclosure sought by the wife was irrelevant. Consequently, the application was dismissed, with all questions of costs reserved. The court granted an extension of time for the husband to comply with earlier orders and outlined further steps for expert selection, document exchange, and mediation.
Orders
Orders of the court
SYC 8105 of 2022
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN:
MS JULIEN
Applicant
AND:
MR PERRIN
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
HARPER J
DATE OF ORDER:
6 FEBRUARY 2025
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The Application in a Proceeding filed on 13 August 2024 be dismissed, apart from questions of costs.
2. The time for compliance by the Respondent De Facto Husband (“husband”) with Order 1 made on 17 April 2024 be extended up to and including 2 September 2024.
3. With respect to Order 1 made on 17 April 2024:
(a) Within 72 hours of the making of these orders the Applicant De Facto Wife (“wife”) shall select in writing one of the proposed experts nominated by the husband on 2 September 2024 to be appointed as the single expert and in the event the wife does not make a selection within that time, the husband shall select one of the persons nominated;
(b) Upon the selection of an expert in accordance with Order 3(a) the person selected shall be the single expert for the purpose of Order 1 made on 17 April 2024 and Ch 7 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
(c) Each party is otherwise to comply, subject to these orders, with the requirements of Order 1 made on 17 April 2024.
4. By no later than 12 noon on Friday, 14 February 2025, the wife's lawyers shall either:
(a) Counter-sign the letter of instruction addressed to the single expert and return to the husband's lawyers, whereupon the husband's lawyers shall provide the letter of instruction to the single expert within 48 hours of receipt; or
(b) Amend and return the letter of instruction to the husband's lawyers.
5. The parties are to submit a draft joint balance sheet to the Chambers of Justice Harper by no later than 4.00 pm on 30 March 2025.
6. Within 14 days of the wife providing the husband a response to the particulars requested by the husband on 24 January 2025, the husband file and serve:
(a) An Amended Response to Initiating Application, in response to the wife’s Second Further Amended Initiating Application filed 11 November 2024; and
(b) Particulars in Response to the wife’s Particulars of Claim filed 13 November 2024.
7. Within 21 days of service of the documents referred to in Order 6, the wife be at liberty to file and serve a Reply to the husband’s Particulars in Response.
8. If the wife refuses or neglects to execute any deed or instrument necessary to give effect to these orders then the Registrar of the Court be appointed pursuant to s 106A of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) to execute such deed or instrument in the name of the wife and to do all acts and things necessary to give validity and operation to the deed or instrument.
9. The proceedings are listed for further mention only at 10.00 am on 31 March 2025.
10. All questions of costs of the applications the subject of this judgment be reserved.
11. On condition that the parties arrange a private mediation of their dispute to take place no later than 31 May 2025, the provisional final hearing dates commencing on 11 August 2025 with an estimate of 5 days are confirmed.
THE COURT NOTES THAT:
A. The parties are advised that any default in compliance with the orders of the Court will result in the dismissal of the Application or Response of the defaulting party, as the case may be.
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.