Oakley & Millar

The appeals were brought by the father against findings of contempt and the penalty imposed following an order of the Family Court of Australia. The father argued that the finding of contempt was improper and that the penalty was excessive. The appeals included applications to adduce further evidence and to amend the grounds of appeal. The mother cross-appealed, arguing that the penalty was insufficient.

The court had to determine whether the father's grounds of appeal were valid and whether the penalty imposed was appropriate. The court also had to decide whether the father could adduce further evidence and amend his grounds of appeal during the appeal process. The mother argued that the penalty imposed was too lenient.

The court found that the father's grounds of appeal were not competent, as they did not challenge the primary judge's findings or the law applied. The court also found that the penalty imposed was not excessive and that the primary judge had properly exercised his discretion. The court held that the father's application to adduce further evidence was irrelevant and that the evidence was available to him at the time of the hearing. The mother's cross-appeal was dismissed as the penalty imposed was considered appropriate.

The appeals were dismissed, and the applications to adduce further evidence and amend the grounds of appeal were also dismissed. There was no order as to costs.