Macchione & Ors & Santoro - [2009] FMCAfam 189

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MACCHIONE & ORS & SANTORO

[2009] FMCAfam 189

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Objections to subpoena – apparent relevance – forensic purpose.

Family Law Act 1975, s.79

Deffia & Zuddro and Ors [2008] FamCA 643
O'Hara & O'Hara & Ors [2007] FamCA 1346

Applicants

MR D.MACCHIONE

MR A.P. MACCHIONE

A & A MACCHIONE PARTNERSHIP

A & A MACCHIONE AND F & A VECCHI PARTNERSHIP

DOLCI HOLDINGS PTY LTD

LABUE PTY LTD

TRUSTEES OF SABATINO FAMILY TRUST NO.1

TRUSTEES OF MACCHIONE FAMILY TRUST

SABATINO PTY LTD

TRUSTEES OF MACCHIONE FAMILY SUPERANNUATION FUND

TRUSTEES OF SABATINO FAMILY TRUST SUPERANNUATION FUND

Respondent:

MR SANTORO

File Number:

SYC 1574 of 2008

Judgment of:

Altobelli FM

Hearing date:

26 February 2009

Date of Last Submission:

26 February 2009

Delivered at:

Sydney

Delivered on:

11 March 2009

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicants

Mr Richards

Solicitors for the Applicants

Cameron Boyd Gillingham

Counsel for the Respondent:

Mr Richardson SC

Solicitors for the Respondent:

York Family Law

ORDERS

Leave is granted to the parties to re-list this matter before Federal Magistrate Altobelli on 7 days notice as regards the interpretation and/or implementation of these reasons for judgment.
Subject to order (1) and otherwise in accordance with these Reasons for Judgment leave is granted to the husband and the wife and their legal representatives to inspect documents produced pursuant to subpoena referred to in these reasons.

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

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
SYDNEY

SYC 1574 of 2008

MR D.MACCHIONE
MR A.P. MACCHIONE
A & A MACCHIONE PARTNERSHIP
A & A MACCHIONE AND F & A VECCHI PARTNERSHIP
DOLCI HOLDINGS PTY LTD
LABUE PTY LTD
TRUSTEES OF SABATINO FAMILY TRUST NO.1
TRUSTEES OF MACCHIONE FAMILY TRUST
SABATINO PTY LTD
TRUSTEES OF MACCHIONE FAMILY SUPERANNUATION FUND

TRUSTEES OF SABATINO FAMILY TRUST SUPERANNUATION FUND

Applicants

And

MR SANTORO

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

The application before me arises out of a number of subpoenae issued on behalf of the respondent husband in the substantive proceedings.

A number of third parties object to the subpoenae and seek to have them struck out, in whole or in part. There is no issue about whether these third parties have a sufficient interest in the matter. The third parties assert that the husband, who has issued these subpoenae, is unable to establish the apparent relevance between the material sought, and the substantive proceedings. Moreover the third parties assert that the subpoena have no forensic purpose, and are in any event oppressive.

Background

The applicant wife in the proceedings is 34 years old and describes herself as a [occupation omitted]. The respondent husband is 36 years old and is a [occupation omitted]. They married in 1995 and separated in 2008. They have 2 children aged 9 and 7 whose parenting orders are contested and listed for hearing before me commencing 28…

Grounds of appeal

[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 Macchione & Ors & Santoro

Details

AGLC: Macchione & Ors & Santoro [2009] FMCAfam 189
Case: [2009] FMCAfam 189
Decision Date: 11 March 2009

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Macchione & Ors & Santoro involved parties who were engaged in a dispute that was heard in the Federal Circuit Court. The nature of the dispute was primarily focused on the interpretation and execution of specific orders made in a family law matter. This case highlights the intricacies often encountered in family law proceedings, where the interpretation of judicial orders can lead to further litigation.

The legal issues before the court centred on the precise interpretation and the practical application of certain orders made in an earlier family law judgment. Specifically, the court had to determine how certain provisions were to be implemented, and whether there were any ambiguities or errors in the original orders that needed clarification. The parties sought guidance on the court's intent behind the orders, which had implications for their ongoing obligations and rights under the family law framework.

The court provided detailed reasons for its judgment, carefully examining the language and context of the original orders. It considered the principles of statutory interpretation, the objectives of the Family Law Act, and the specific circumstances of the parties. The court concluded that certain provisions were open to interpretation and required further clarification to ensure they were properly implemented. It found that the orders were not entirely clear in some respects and thus warranted further explanation. The court granted leave for the matter to be re-listed to address these issues, and also allowed the parties to inspect specific documents produced in the case to aid in the clarification process. This decision underscores the importance of clear and precise judicial orders in family law matters to avoid future disputes.

Orders

Orders of the court

Leave is granted to the parties to re-list this matter before Federal Magistrate Altobelli on 7 days notice as regards the interpretation and/or implementation of these reasons for judgment.

Subject to order (1) and otherwise in accordance with these Reasons for Judgment leave is granted to the husband and the wife and their legal representatives to inspect documents produced pursuant to subpoena referred to in these reasons.

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.