Lamrock & Lamrock

[2008] FamCAFC 79

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

LAMROCK & LAMROCK

[2008] FamCAFC 79

FAMILY LAW - APPEAL – PROPERTY – Whether the trial Judge should have treated the company, of which the husband was sole director and shareholder, as the alter ego of the husband – Whether trial Judge erred in treating the company debts separately from the husband’s personal liabilities - Where unsecured loan to the company from the husband’s family made - Where husband had not given a personal guarantee in respect of company borrowings – Where husband sought to include the company’s liabilities in the parties’ asset pool – Where company’s assets not sought to be included in the parties’ asset pool – Discussion of S & M & Ors [2003] FamCA 1387 and Ascot Investments Pty Ltd v Harper (1980-1981) 148 CLR 337- No error by trial Judge in not including the family loan to the company as a personal liability of the husband.

FAMILY LAW - APPEAL – CONTRIBUTION ASSESSMENT - Whether trial Judge erred in assessment of initial contributions – No error by trial Judge – Appeal dismissed.

FAMILY LAW - APPEAL - CHILD SUPPORT – LEAVE TO APPEAL - Where s 102 of the Child Support (Assessment)Act 1989 (Cth) requires leave of the Full Court to appeal a departure application determination – Whether trial Judge erred in determination of husband’s financial position – Where payments were being collected by the Child Support Agency and payment of arrears could only be enforced by the Child Support Registrar under s 30 Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth) - Where no substantial injustice demonstrated – Leave to appeal child support departure determination refused.

FAMILY LAW - APPLICATION TO ADDUCE FURTHER EVIDENCE – Where husband sought to adduce further evidence of the birth of his second child to support application of variation to the existing child support departure order – Where husband concedes the circumstance of the birth is a matter to be raised at first instance - Where husband sought to adduce further evidence to impugn the trial Judge’s determination that the wife had spent $32,000 on legal fees – Where the husband submitted $32,000 spent by the wife on legal fees should be “added back” to the asset pool – Where trial Judge included the payment of the wife’s legal fees in the parties’ lists of assets – Application to adduce further evidence rejected.

FAMILY LAW - COSTS – Where appeal against property orders dismissed – Where leave to appeal child support departure determination refused – Appellant husband to pay costs as agreed or assessed.

Child Support (Assessment)Act 1989 (Cth) s 102
Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth) s 30
Family Law Act1975 (Cth) s 79
First Corporate Law Simplification Act 1995 (Cth)

Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Phillip Morris & Anor (1981)148 CLR 170
Ascot Investments Pty Ltd v Harper (1980-1981) 148 CLR 337; (1981) FLC 91-000
Bassingthwaite v Leane (1993) FLC 92-410
Gyselman…