FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – Property – Superannuation – Where the wife appeals from final property orders under which she received almost all available assets apart from superannuation – Where no superannuation splitting order could be made in the absence of necessary evidence of taxation consequences and any complying superfund into which a split proportion could be paid in favour of the wife – Where the wife refers to errors of fact, inadequate reasoning, failure to take into account or misunderstanding evidence, bias, procedural unfairness, inadequate assessment of health, manifest injustice – Where the wife did not provide a transcript of the trial to support claims of bias or denial of procedural fairness – Where the wife sought to rely on voluminous documents many of which were not before the primary judge – Where the grounds of appeal are difficult to understand – Where no discernible error in the primary judge’s reasons – Appeal dismissed.
[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 Macarthur & Macarthur (No 3)
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Macarthur & Macarthur (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC1A 35
Case
[2024] FedCFamC1A 35
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Ms Macarthur appealed from final property orders made by the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, which awarded her almost all available assets apart from superannuation. The husband, Mr Macarthur, opposed the appeal. The wife sought to appeal on multiple grounds, including alleged errors of fact, inadequate reasoning, failure to take into account evidence, bias, procedural unfairness, inadequate assessment of her health, and manifest injustice. The wife also argued that the trial judge misunderstood the evidence and made a discernible error in his reasons.
The court found that the wife's grounds of appeal were difficult to understand and did not provide a transcript of the trial to support claims of bias or procedural unfairness. The court also noted that the wife sought to rely on voluminous documents, many of which were not before the primary judge. The court concluded that there was no discernible error in the primary judge’s reasons for the orders. The court dismissed the wife’s appeal on the basis that the grounds presented were inadequate and did not demonstrate any error warranting the appeal.
The court found no merit in the wife's arguments and affirmed the original property orders. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed in its entirety. The court's order was that the appeal NAA 339 of 2023 is dismissed, with no changes to the property orders previously made.
Orders
Orders of the court
NAA 339 of 2023
BRC 6154 of 2020
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
DIVISION 1 APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BETWEEN:
MS MACARTHUR
Appellant
AND:
MR MACARTHUR
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
ALDRIDGE, TREE & HARPER JJ
DATE OF ORDER:
22 MARCH 2024
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Appeal NAA 339 of 2023 is dismissed.
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).