Lahiri & Saha (No 7) - [2023] FedCFamC1F 999

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Lahiri & Saha (No 7) [2023] FedCFamC1F 999

File number BRC 8518 of 2020

Judgment of: CAMPTON J

Date of judgment: 20 November 2023

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application to adjourn review of order made by a judicial registrar extending the time for the operation of primary enforcement orders made by a judge –where a prior application for a stay of the primary orders has been refused and an appeal from the primary orders dismissed by the Full Court – application refused

Legislation:
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 102NA

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) ch 14

Division: Division 1 First Instance

Number of paragraphs: 10

Date of hearing: 20 November 2023

Place: Sydney

Counsel for the Applicant: Litigant in person

Solicitor for the First Respondent: A P Hodgson & Associates

Counsel for the Second Respondent: My Neggo

Solicitor for the Second Respondent: Stacks Law Firm

Counsel for the Third Respondent: Did not participate
ORDERS

BRC 8518 of 2020

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)

BETWEEN:
MS SAHA

Applicant

AND:
MR LAHIRI

First Respondent

MR FELTOS

Second Respondent

D PTY LTD AS TRUSTEE FOR THE D PTY LTD SUPERANNUATION FUND

Third Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

CAMPTON J

DATE OF ORDER:

20 NOVEMBER 2023

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The application of the wife to adjourn the relief sought in paragraphs 1 and 4 of her Application in a Proceeding filed 28 September 2023 and sealed 4 October 2023 is refused.

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 the pseudonym Lahiri & Saha has been approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
CAMPTON J:

I refuse the wife’s application for adjournment for the follow.
Briefly, by way of an Application in a Proceeding filed 28 September 2023 and sealed by the Court on 4 October 2023, Ms Saha (“the wife”) seeks relief by way of review pursuant to ch 14 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) of an enforcement order made by a Judicial Registrar on 13 September 2023, relief as to the transfer of proceedings in Brisbane to the Sydney Registry of the Court, relief as to Jarrett…

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 Lahiri & Saha (No 7)

Details

AGLC: Lahiri & Saha (No 7) [2023] FedCFamC1F 999
Case: [2023] FedCFamC1F 999
Decision Date: 20 November 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Lahiri & Saha (No 7), Ms Saha applied to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia to adjourn the review of an order made by a judicial registrar extending the time for the operation of primary enforcement orders made by a judge. The application was made in the context of ongoing family law proceedings between Ms Saha and Mr Lahiri, with Mr Feltos and D Pty Ltd as Trustee for the D Pty Ltd Superannuation Fund also being respondents. The primary issue before the court was whether the application to adjourn should be granted, given the history of prior unsuccessful applications for a stay and an appeal against the primary orders. The court was required to determine if the application was an appropriate exercise of its discretion to adjourn the proceedings.

The court thoroughly considered the history of the case and the arguments presented by Ms Saha. It noted that a previous application for a stay of the primary orders had been refused, and an appeal from those orders had been dismissed by the Full Court. The court found that the application to adjourn was not warranted, as it would not serve the interests of justice given the history of unsuccessful applications and the appeal. The court held that the application did not present any new or exceptional circumstances that would justify a departure from the usual course of proceedings.

Accordingly, the court dismissed the application to adjourn. The application of Ms Saha to adjourn the relief sought in paragraphs 1 and 4 of her application was refused. This decision reaffirms the court’s stance on the importance of adhering to the usual course of proceedings in family law matters, particularly where there have been prior unsuccessful attempts to stay or appeal the primary orders. The court’s order ensures that the primary enforcement orders remain in effect, pending further developments in the proceedings.

Orders

Orders of the court

BRC 8518 of 2020

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)

BETWEEN:

MS SAHA

Applicant

AND:

MR LAHIRI

First Respondent

MR FELTOS

Second Respondent

D PTY LTD AS TRUSTEE FOR THE D PTY LTD SUPERANNUATION FUND

Third Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

CAMPTON J

DATE OF ORDER:

20 NOVEMBER 2023

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The application of the wife to adjourn the relief sought in paragraphs 1 and 4 of her Application in a Proceeding filed 28 September 2023 and sealed 4 October 2023 is refused.

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.

File number	BRC 8518 of 2020
Judgment of:	CAMPTON J
Date of judgment:	20 November 2023
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application to adjourn review of order made by a judicial registrar extending the time for the operation of primary enforcement orders made by a judge –where a prior application for a stay of the primary orders has been refused and an appeal from the primary orders dismissed by the Full Court – application refused
Legislation:	Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 102NA Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) ch 14
Division:	Division 1 First Instance
Number of paragraphs:	10
Date of hearing:	20 November 2023
Place:	Sydney
Counsel for the Applicant:	Litigant in person
Solicitor for the First Respondent:	A P Hodgson & Associates
Counsel for the Second Respondent:	My Neggo
Solicitor for the Second Respondent:	Stacks Law Firm
Counsel for the Third Respondent:	Did not participate

BRC 8518 of 2020
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN:	MS SAHA Applicant
AND:	MR LAHIRI First Respondent MR FELTOS Second Respondent D PTY LTD AS TRUSTEE FOR THE D PTY LTD SUPERANNUATION FUND Third Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	CAMPTON J
DATE OF ORDER:	20 NOVEMBER 2023