Leong & Wu

[2021] FamCAFC 99

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Leong & Wu [2021] FamCAFC 99

Appeal from:

Leong & Wu (No.2) [2020] FCCA 271

Appeal number(s):

EAA 22 of 2020

File number(s):

CAC 1783 of 2013

Judgment of:

AINSLIE-WALLACE J

Date of judgment:

24 June 2021

Catchwords:

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – APPLICATION IN AN APPEAL – REINSTATEMENT – Failure to file digital transcript – Appeal deemed abandoned – Delay explained – Where the appeal is not so devoid of merit that it would be futile to reinstate it – Prejudice – Application allowed – No order as to costs.

Legislation:

Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) r 22.21

Cases cited:

Gallo v Dawson (1990) 93 ALR 479; [1990] HCA 30

Jackamarra v Krakouer (1998) 195 CLR 516; [1998] HCA 27

Rand & Rand [2009] FamCAFC 88

Division:

Appeal Division

Number of paragraphs:

29

Date of hearing:

15 June 2021

Place:

Sydney

The Applicant:

Litigant in person

Counsel for the Respondent:

Mr Stagg

Solicitor for the Respondent:

Hijazi Curran Cameron Lawyers

ORDERS

EAA 22 of 2020
CAC 1783 of 2013

APPEAL DIVISION OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

MR LEONG

Applicant

AND:

MS WU

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	AINSLIE-WALLACE J
DATE OF ORDER:	24 JUNE 2021

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Appeal EAA 22 of 2020 be reinstated.

2.The applicant is to file the digital transcript by no later than 4.00 pm on Friday 2 July 2021 or failing that, make an application to dispense with the requirement to provide the transcript.

3.There be no order as to costs.

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 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Leong & Wu has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

AINSLIE-WALLACE J:

1. On 17 February 2020 Mr Leong (“the applicant”) appealed against orders made by a judge of the Federal Circuit Court on 17 January 2020 in proceedings between him and Ms Wu (“the respondent”) in which the primary judge refused his application to reopen final property settlement proceedings as between the applicant and the respondent.  Those proceedings had been determined by the primary judge on 18 November 2019.

2. The November 2019 proceedings were conducted in the absence of the applicant.  At the conclusion of the hearing the primary judge made final property settlement orders as between the parties.  The primary judge further made a costs order against the applicant in the sum of $41,540.  While ex tempore reasons for judgment were delivered at the conclusion of the November 2019 hearing, no settled reasons have ever been delivered.

3. The applicant did not appeal from this decision.