Milano and Nolan

[2018] FCCA 3901

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

MILANO & NOLAN [2018] FCCA 3901

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Property – spousal maintenance – litigation guardian appointed – consideration of urgent and/or interim spousal maintenance – consideration of ‘immediate need’ – whether parties have separated.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss.74, 77

Cases cited:

Ashton & Ashton (1982) 8 Fam LR 675

Gyopar v Gyopar (1986) FLC 91-769
Hall & Hall [2016] HCA 23

In the Marriage of Hayson (1987) 11 Fam LR 593

In the Marriage of Lane [1976] FLC 90-055
Sadlier & Sadlier [2015] FamCAFC 130

Applicant: MS MILANO

Respondent: MR NOLAN
(BY HIS LITIGATION GUARDIAN)

File Number: MLC 12093 of 2017

Judgment of: Judge Mercuri

Hearing date: 19 December 2018

Date of Last Submission: 19 December 2018

Delivered at: Melbourne

Delivered on: 19 December 2018

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the applicant: Mr Fuller

Solicitors for the applicant: Velos & Velos

Counsel for the respondent: Ms Teicher

Solicitors for the respondent: Davies Moloney Barristers & Solicitors

ORDERS

1. Within 7 days, the respondent pay to the applicant the following lump sums pursuant to section 77 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth):

   (a)the sum of $4,500 for the applicant’s periodontist fees; and

   (b)the sum of $745 for the applicant’s dentist fees.

2. All other extant applications be otherwise adjourned for an interim defended hearing on 15 February 2019 at 10:00am.

3. The matter be adjourned for final hearing on 7 October 2019 at 10:00am (with an estimated hearing time of 2 days).

4. In the event that the matter resolves prior to the adjourned date, the parties be at liberty to contact the chambers of Judge Mercuri or the chambers of Judge Small with proposed final consent orders.

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT MELBOURNE

MLC 12093 of 2017

MS MILANO

Applicant

And

MR NOLAN
(by his litigation guardian)

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(revised from the transcript)

1. These reasons for judgment were delivered orally. They have been corrected from the transcript. Grammatical errors have been corrected and an attempt has been made to render the orally delivered reasons amenable to being read.

2. This is an application for urgent orders made pursuant to section 77 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”) by the applicant wife.

Background

1. Based on the affidavit material filed to date, the uncontroversial background to this matter is briefly as follows.  The applicant is 64 years of age, has four adult children from a previous relationship and met the respondent in 2010 in response to an advertisement placed by the respondent in a … newspaper.  The applicant and the respondent married in 2011 and lived together in the former matrimonial home, being a unit in Property A. 

2. This unit was owned by the respondent at the time of the commencement of the parties’ relationship.  The respondent is 97 years of age and, in September…