Keskin & Keskin and Anor

In the Family Court of Australia, Keskin & Keskin and Anor was a case involving an appeal against a property settlement order made in the proceedings. The husband sought to challenge the property settlement order, arguing that the orders made by the primary judge did not accurately reflect the agreed upon division of 60/40 of the spouses' property. Additionally, the husband sought leave to adduce further evidence, which was contested by the wife.

The primary legal issues the court needed to address were whether the husband was entitled to adduce further evidence, and if the appeal had identified errors in the primary judge’s determination of the spouses’ property interests. The court had to determine if the primary judge’s findings and orders contained material mistakes of fact and if the reasons provided by the primary judge were adequate. Furthermore, the court had to consider whether the appeal demonstrated sufficient error to warrant setting aside the orders and remitting the matter for reconsideration.

The court found that the husband's application for leave to adduce further evidence was not necessary because the existing evidence was sufficient to demonstrate the appealable errors. The court also found that the primary judge had made several errors in determining the spouses' property interests, including misapplying the agreed division ratio, miscalculating the net value of the land owned by a private corporation in which the husband was a minority shareholder, and incorrectly handling the net proceeds of sale. These errors were intrinsic to the findings about the property interests, leading to the conclusion that the appeal demonstrated material mistakes of fact. The court found the primary judge's reasons inadequate, leading to the conclusion that the orders were vitiated. The appeal succeeded on multiple grounds, and the orders were set aside. The matter was remitted for reconsideration by another judge. Costs certificates were granted in favour of the wife.