Levy & Levy

Case [2023] FedCFamC2F 1456


FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

(DIVISION 2)

Levy & Levy [2023] FedCFamC2F 1456

File number(s): PAC 1943 of 2023
Judgment of: JUDGE NEWBRUN
Date of judgment: 16 November 2023 
Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – property proceedings – threshold hearing – leave granted to husband to commence property proceedings out of time.
Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 44(3), 79
Cases cited:

Hardwick & Hardwick (No 2) [2022] FedCFamC1A 216

Skelton & Lindop (2022) 64 Fam LR 617

Division: Division 2 Family Law
Number of paragraphs: 62
Date of hearing: 3 November 2023
Place: Parramatta
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr J Shaw
Solicitor for the Applicant: Hutchison Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr R D Turnbull
Solicitor for the Respondent: Abbas Jacobs Lawyers

ORDERS

PAC 1943 of 2023

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MR LEVY

Applicant

AND:

MS LEVY

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE NEWBRUN

DATE OF ORDER:

16 NOVEMBER 2023

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Pursuant to s 44(3) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”), leave is granted to the Applicant Husband to make an application for Orders under s 79 of the Act out of time.

2.The proceedings are adjourned to 19 February 2024 at 9.30 am for mention.

AND THE COURT NOTES THAT:

A.The Applicant Husband commenced proceedings on 20 April 2023. There is no need for him to file a fresh Initiating Application pursuant to the above Order granting leave.

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 a pseudonym has been approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

JUDGE NEWBRUN:

INTRODUCTION

  1. These reasons for judgment relate to the Applicant husband’s application, pursuant to s 44(3) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”), seeking leave to commence property adjustment proceedings under s 79 of the Act out of time.

  2. In these reasons, for ease of reference, the Applicant husband shall be referred to as the husband and the Respondent wife shall be referred to as the wife.

  3. The husband was born in 1976, and is now aged 47 years.

  4. The wife was born in 1984, and is now aged 39 years.

  5. The parties had married in Country B in 2004.

  6. The parties had two daughters, X now aged 17 years, and Y now aged 14 years.

  7. Their…

Continue reading Levy & Levy

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Levy & Levy [2023] FedCFamC2F 1456
Case
[2023] FedCFamC2F 1456
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, the matter of Mr Levy versus Ms Levy was heard. The applicant, Mr Levy, sought leave to initiate property proceedings beyond the statutory time limit, which is a significant issue in this case. The respondent, Ms Levy, opposed the application on the grounds of undue delay and prejudice. The court had to determine whether Mr Levy's application for leave to proceed out of time was justified and whether it should grant relief under section 44(3) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

The court considered the circumstances surrounding the delay, the reasons for it, and the potential prejudice to the respondent if the application were to proceed. It examined the balance of convenience and the merits of the application, weighing the applicant’s arguments against the respondent's opposition. The court found that the applicant had demonstrated a sufficient basis for his delay, and that the prejudice to the respondent was not insurmountable. Consequently, the court concluded that it was in the interests of justice to grant the application for leave.

Pursuant to section 44(3) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), the court granted leave to the applicant to make an application for Orders under section 79 of the Act out of time. The proceedings were adjourned to 19 February 2024 at 9.30 am for mention. The court noted that there was no need for the applicant to file a fresh Initiating Application due to the granting of leave.

Orders

Orders of the court

PAC 1943 of 2023

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MR LEVY

Applicant

AND:

MS LEVY

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE NEWBRUN

DATE OF ORDER:

16 NOVEMBER 2023

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. Pursuant to s 44(3) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”), leave is granted to the Applicant Husband to make an application for Orders under s 79 of the Act out of time.

2. The proceedings are adjourned to 19 February 2024 at 9.30 am for mention.

AND THE COURT NOTES THAT:

A. The Applicant Husband commenced proceedings on 20 April 2023. There is no need for him to file a fresh Initiating Application pursuant to the above Order granting leave.

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.