Mead v Mead (No 2) - [2010] FCA 432

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Mead v Mead (No 2) [2010] FCA 432

Citation: Mead v Mead (No 2) [2010] FCA 432

Appeals from: Mead v Mead (No 2) [2009] FMCA 1107
Mead v Yang [2009] FMCA 1160

Parties:
LUCY GUITAR MEAD v COLIN ANTHONY MEAD

LEE CHIN LIEN YANG v COLIN ANTHONY MEAD

File number(s): NSD 1445 of 2009
NSD 1447 of 2009

Judge: JACOBSON J

Date of judgment: 6 May 2010

Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – failure to comply with Court order to pay security for costs – want of prosecution – appeals are a re-ventilation of matters already argued – appeals dismissed

Legislation:
Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 25(2B)(ba), 25(2B)(bb)(i)

Cases cited: Mead v Mead [2010] FCA 288 cited
Lee Chin Lien Yang v Colin Anthony Mead [2010] HCASL 51 referred to
Lucy Guitar Mead v Colin Anthony Mead [2010] HCASL 52 referred to
Yang v Mead [2009] FCA 1202 cited

Date of hearing: 6 May 2010

Date of last submissions: 6 May 2010

Place: Sydney

Division: GENERAL DIVISION

Category: Catchwords

Number of paragraphs: 12

In NSD 1445 of 2009:

The Appellant: The Appellant appeared in person

Solicitor for the Respondent: Mr Lim of Etheringtons Solicitors

In NSD 1447 of 2009:

The Appellant: Ms L Mead made submissions on behalf of the Appellant

Solicitor for the Respondent: Mr Lim of Etheringtons Solicitors

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

NSD 1445 of 2009

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:
LUCY GUITAR MEAD
Appellant

AND:
COLIN ANTHONY MEAD
Respondent

JUDGE:

JACOBSON J

DATE OF ORDER:

6 MAY 2010

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The appeal be dismissed.

Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
The text of entered orders can be located using Federal Law Search on the Court’s website.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

NSD 1447 of 2009

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:
LEE CHIN LIEN YANG
Appellant

AND:
COLIN ANTHONY MEAD
Respondent

JUDGE:

JACOBSON J

DATE OF ORDER:

6 MAY 2010

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be dismissed.
Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
The text of entered orders can be located using Federal Law Search on the Court’s website.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

NSD 1445 OF 2009

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:
LUCY GUITAR MEAD
Appellant

AND:
COLIN ANTHONY MEAD
Respondent

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

NSD 1447 OF 2009

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:
LEE CHIN LIEN YANG
Appellant

AND:
COLIN ANTHONY MEAD
Respondent

JUDGE:

JACOBSON J

DATE:

6 MAY 2010

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

On 11 March 2010 I made orders for security for…

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 Mead v Mead (No 2)

Details

AGLC: Mead v Mead (No 2) [2010] FCA 432
Case: [2010] FCA 432
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The two appeals in this matter were heard by Jacobson J in the Federal Court of Australia. Lucy Guitar Mead and Lee Chin Lien Yang, the appellants, sought to appeal against orders made by the Federal Magistrates Court concerning security for costs and sequestration orders. Colin Anthony Mead, the respondent, argued that the appeals should be dismissed due to the appellants' failure to comply with the Court's order to provide security for costs. The legal issues before the Court were whether the appeals could be dismissed due to the appellants' failure to comply with the order for security for costs and whether the appeals constituted a re-ventilation of matters already argued.

The Court found that it had the power to dismiss the appeals under section 25(2B)(bb)(i) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 due to the appellants' failure to comply with the direction of the Court. The Court also found that the appeals could be dismissed for want of prosecution under section 25(2B)(ba) of the same Act. The appellants' failure to provide security for costs in accordance with the Court's orders was considered as the reason for the want of prosecution. The Court dismissed the appeals, stating that the arguments presented by the appellants were at best slim and merely a re-ventilation of matters already argued. The rejection of the applications for special leave by the High Court was also considered an important factor in the Court's decision.

The Court dismissed both appeals and made an order that the appeals be dismissed in each matter. The final orders were made on 6 May 2010 in Sydney, and the appellants were required to pay costs associated with the appeals.

Orders