Marborough and Marborough

[2009] FamCA 1184

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MARBOROUGH & MARBOROUGH [2009] FamCA 1184

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Transfer to Federal Magistrates Court

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Marborough

RESPONDENT: Mr Marborough

FILE NUMBER: MLC 6787 of 2009

DATE DELIVERED: 20 November 2009

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Cronin J

HEARING DATE: 20 November 2009

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Meehan

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Septimus Jones & Lee

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Strum

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: JH Legal Pty Ltd

Orders

1. That BY CONSENT there be orders in accordance with the minutes of proposed orders marked Exhibit “A” sealed and attached hereto AND IT IS DIRECTED that such minutes remain upon the Court file.

2. That the solicitor for the wife engross the minutes and deliver them by electronic transmission to my Associate within 7 days.

3. That the listing in the Senior Registrar’s Duty List on 15 December 2009 be vacated.

4. That each party file and serve all trial material upon which they intend to rely within six weeks of this date.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: MLC 6787 of 2009

MS MARBOROUGH

Applicant

And

MR MARBOROUGH

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is a matter in the duty list.  It was here predominantly because there was a dispute about maintenance issues and the parties very sensibly have come to a compromise and agreed to orders which I am content to make.  The matter is to be transferred to the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia at Melbourne on the basis that it is a modest pool of assets and it is within the jurisdiction of that court.

2. The reasons why the parties have not been able to finalise the property matters today are predominantly two-fold.  There is an argument about some $75,000 to be added back to the pool of assets.  There is also an issue about the husband’s acquisition of an interest in an off-the-plan property.  It behoves all parties to make comprehensive disclosure of all of their financial circumstances, and in the event that a financial statement has been filed and the circumstances change then the obligation is to file an updated one. 

3. The Federal Magistrates Court is the appropriate place for this case to be heard and the parties sensibly are endeavouring to work out the problems without the involvement of a judicial decision.  Accordingly I am satisfied it is an appropriate matter to be transferred.

I certify that the preceding three (3) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Cronin

Associate: 

Date:  4 December 2009