Mendicino & Mendicino (Contravention)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MENDICINO & MENDICINO (CONTRAVENTION) [2015] FamCA 1179

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application – Dismissal – Where the father makes an oral application to have the mother’s contravention application summarily dismissed – Application dismissed.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Mendicino

RESPONDENT: Mr Mendicino

FILE NUMBER: BRC 875 of 2013

DATE DELIVERED: 22 December 2015

PLACE DELIVERED: Brisbane

PLACE HEARD: Brisbane

JUDGMENT OF: Forrest J

HEARING DATE: 15 December 2015

REPRESENTATION

THE APPLICANT: In Person

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Richardson SC

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Hopgood Ganim

Orders

1. That the respondent father’s oral application for summary dismissal of the applicant mother’s Contravention Application is dismissed.

2. That the said Contravention Application and the Amended Application in a Case filed 7 December 2015 be adjourned for further hearing at 10.00 am on Friday, 16 March 2016.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Mendicino & Mendicino has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT BRISBANE

FILE NUMBER: BRC 875 of 2013

Ms Mendicino

Applicant

And

Ms Mendicino

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. On 20 July 2015, just before a trial listed for ten days commenced in this Court, property adjustment and parenting orders were made by Kent J with the consent of the mother and father. Now, just five months later, the mother and the father are parties to contravention proceedings commenced by an application filed on 23 October 2015 by the mother.

2. The mother’s contravention application, in which she asserts contravention by the father of the primary parenting order made 20 July 2015, was listed for hearing by me on 15 December 2015. At the same time as the mother filed the contravention application, she filed an Application in a Case in which she set out orders she was seeking in respect of parenting matters. On 7 December 2015, the mother filed an Amended Application in a Case in which she amended the orders she sought in her earlier Application in a Case in respect of the parenting matters.

3. When the matter was called on for hearing at 10:00 am on 15 December 2015, the mother appeared without legal representation and the father was represented by Mr Grahame Richardson SC instructed by Hopgood Ganim Lawyers. The father was not present in Court, but rather was said to be in the air in transit from overseas to Brisbane, returning from a business trip the Court was told was booked on 30 July this year, well before the mother’s contravention application was filed.

4. At the outset of the hearing, Mr Richardson informed the Court that he wished to make submissions in support of an oral application that the mother’s contravention application be summarily dismissed. Firstly though, he asked if the mother could clarify whether the orders she seeks as set out in her Amended Application in a Case filed 7 December 2015 are…