LEVINE-FERBER & LEVINE

[2014] FCCA 1280

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

LEVINE-FERBER & LEVINE [2014] FCCA 1280

Catchwords:
CHILD SUPPORT – Costs of child – declaration.

FAMILY LAW – Parentage – declaration of parentage – where respondent did not attend court.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Default of appearance – decision to proceed with hearing generally under Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001, r.13.03C.

Legislation:

Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth), s.106A

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), s.69VA
Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001, Rule 13.03C

Applicant: MS LEVINE-FERBER

Respondent: MR LEVINE

File Number: SYC 2372 of 2014

Judgment of: Judge Scarlett

Hearing date: 10 June 2014

Date of Last Submission: 10 June 2014

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 10 June 2014

REPRESENTATION

Solicitor for the Applicant: Ms Cameron

Solicitors for the Applicant: Legal Aid NSW Parramatta

The Respondent: No appearance

IT IS DECLARED THAT

1. As provided by section 69VA of the Family Law Act 1975 the Respondent MR LEVINE is the father of the child [X] born [in] 2000.

2. In accordance with section 106A of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 the Respondent MR LEVINE should be assessed in relation to the costs of the child [X] born [in] 2000 because MR LEVINE is a parent of the child [X].

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Levine-Ferber & Levine is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYC 2372 of 2014

MS LEVINE-FERBER

Applicant

And

MR LEVINE

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Application

1. This is an Application by the mother of a girl who was born [in] 2000 for the following declarations:

   a)that the Respondent is the child’s father, as provided by s.69VA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth); and

   b)that the Respondent should be assessed in relation to the costs of the child under s.106A of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth) because he is a parent of the child.

Evidence

1. The Applicant relies on the following:

   a)her affidavit affirmed on 4^th April 2014;

   b)an affidavit of service by Mr S sworn on 12^th May 2014; and

   c)an Acknowledgment of Service dated 12^th May 2014 and signed by the Respondent. 

Hearing

1. The Applicant attended Court with her solicitor. The Respondent did not attend Court and there was no explanation for his absence. Accordingly, a decision was made to proceed with the hearing generally under the provisions of Rule 13.03C (e).

2. The Applicant gave oral evidence, adhering to the material in her affidavit as to the reasons why she was of the belief that the Respondent is her child’s father.

Conclusions

1. I am satisfied on the evidence that the child is indeed the child of the Respondent and a declaration will be made accordingly. I am also satisfied that a declaration should be made that the Respondent should be assessed in respect of the costs of the child.

2. The Applicant did not seek an order for costs and no order will be made.  

I certify that the preceding six (6) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge Scarlett

Associate: 

Date: 18 June 2014