Mahoney - [2025] FedCFamC1A 70

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1) APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Mahoney [2025] FedCFamC1A 70

Appeal from: Mahoney & Dieter (No 4) [2024] FedCFamC1F 813

Appeal number: NAA 350 of 2024

File number: MLC 4348 of 2020

Judgment of: RIETHMULLER, CAMPTON & CHRISTIE JJ

Date of judgment: 17 April 2025

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – APPLICATION IN AN APPEAL – LEAVE TO APPEAL – Vexatious Proceedings – Application for leave governed by s 102QE of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where the orders the applicant seeks to challenge are not materially different from the applicant's own minute of order – Where the applicant advances no reasonable grounds for the proposed appeal – Where the proposed appeal is vexatious and the application for leave to appeal must be dismissed – No orders as to costs.

Legislation: Family Law Act1975 (Cth) ss 102Q, 102QAC, 102QAG, 102QB, 102QE, 102QF

Cases cited:
Forbes and Bream (2008) 222 FLR 96; [2008] FamCAFC 189

Mahoney & Dieter (No 4) [2024] FedCFamC1F 813

Pencious & Searle (2017) FLC 93-805; [2017] FamCAFC 210

Sampson & Hartnett (Provision of Transcript) (2013) FLC 93-542; [2010] FamCAFC 220

Number of paragraphs: 30

Date of hearing: 3 April 2025

Place: Heard in Melbourne, delivered in Parramatta

First Applicant: Litigant in person

Second Applicant: Litigant in person (did not participate)
ORDERS

NAA 350 of 2024
MLC 4348 of 2020

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
DIVISION 1 APPELLATE JURISDICTION

MR MAHONEY

First Applicant

MS MAHONEY

Second Applicant

ORDER MADE BY:

RIETHMULLER, CAMPTON AND CHRISTIE JJ

DATE OF ORDER:

17 APRIL 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The Application in an Appeal filed 13 December 2024 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).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of 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 the pseudonym Mahoney has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
RIETHMULLER, CAMPTON & CHRISTIE JJ:

This is an application for leave to appeal against parenting orders and orders which were made under s 102QB(2)(b) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”) by a Justice of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1). The first applicant is Mr Mahoney (“the stepfather”) and the second applicant is Ms Mahoney (“the mother”). The stepfather appeared on the hearing of the application as a litigant in person. There was no…

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 Mahoney

Details

AGLC: Mahoney [2025] FedCFamC1A 70
Case: [2025] FedCFamC1A 70
Decision Date: 17 April 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved an appeal by Mr. Mahoney and Ms. Mahoney against certain orders made in their family law proceedings. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, sitting in its appellate jurisdiction, was tasked with determining whether leave should be granted for the appeal. The applicants sought to challenge specific orders made in the case, but their proposed minute of order was not materially different from the orders they were seeking to appeal against. This raised questions about the merit and purpose of the proposed appeal.

The court had to decide whether the applicants had advanced reasonable grounds for the appeal, and whether the proposed appeal was vexatious. Given that the orders sought to be appealed were essentially the same as those proposed by the applicants themselves, and considering the absence of any reasonable grounds for the appeal, the court concluded that the appeal was vexatious. The applicants had not demonstrated that the appeal would serve any meaningful purpose, and therefore, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

In summary, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia dismissed the application for leave to appeal, finding that the proposed appeal was vexatious and lacked reasonable grounds. The court made no orders as to costs. The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records, and any minor typographical or grammatical errors may be reviewed or corrected as per the relevant rules.

Orders

Orders of the court

NAA 350 of 2024

MLC 4348 of 2020

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

DIVISION 1 APPELLATE JURISDICTION

MR MAHONEY

First Applicant

MS MAHONEY

Second Applicant

ORDER MADE BY:

RIETHMULLER, CAMPTON AND CHRISTIE JJ

DATE OF ORDER:

17 APRIL 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The Application in an Appeal filed 13 December 2024 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).

Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of 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.

Appeal from:	Mahoney & Dieter (No 4) [2024] FedCFamC1F 813
Appeal number:	NAA 350 of 2024
File number:	MLC 4348 of 2020
Judgment of:	RIETHMULLER, CAMPTON & CHRISTIE JJ
Date of judgment:	17 April 2025
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – APPLICATION IN AN APPEAL – LEAVE TO APPEAL – Vexatious Proceedings – Application for leave governed by s 102QE of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where the orders the applicant seeks to challenge are not materially different from the applicant's own minute of order – Where the applicant advances no reasonable grounds for the proposed appeal – Where the proposed appeal is vexatious and the application for leave to appeal must be dismissed – No orders as to costs.
Legislation:	Family Law Act1975 (Cth) ss 102Q, 102QAC, 102QAG, 102QB, 102QE, 102QF
Cases cited:	Forbes and Bream (2008) 222 FLR 96; [2008] FamCAFC 189 Mahoney & Dieter (No 4) [2024] FedCFamC1F 813 Pencious & Searle (2017) FLC 93-805; [2017] FamCAFC 210 Sampson & Hartnett (Provision of Transcript) (2013) FLC 93-542; [2010] FamCAFC 220
Number of paragraphs:	30
Date of hearing:	3 April 2025
Place:	Heard in Melbourne, delivered in Parramatta
First Applicant:	Litigant in person
Second Applicant:	Litigant in person (did not participate)

ORDER MADE BY:	RIETHMULLER, CAMPTON AND CHRISTIE JJ
DATE OF ORDER:	17 APRIL 2025