Oldham and Avis

[2017] FCCA 1480

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

OLDHAM & AVIS [2017] FCCA 1480

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Practice and Procedure – where the substantive proceedings relate to competing applications for de facto property adjustment – controversy as to date of separation – consideration of the differences between Part VIII and Part VIIIAB jurisdiction – where the Respondent seeks that the proceedings be transferred to the Family Court of Australia – consideration of rule 8.02 of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975, ss.4AA, 4(ca), 44(5), 60I, 75(2), 79, 90RD, 90SB, 90SM, 114
Marriage Act 1961, ss.5, 11
Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948, Article 1, Article 2
Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900, s.116
Relationships Register Act2010
Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001, rr.4.01, 8.02, 16.05
Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999, ss.39, 41
Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011

Explanatory Memorandum, Civil Dispute Resolution Bill 2010 (Cth)

Family Law Rules 2004

Cases cited:
Benedict & Peake [2014] FCCA 642
Angkawijaya & Anor v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2015] FCCA 450
Minister for Immigration v Dhillon [1990] FCA 144
R v Cahill (1978) 2 NSWLR 453
Norton & Locke (2013) FLC 93-567
Holden & Wolff [2014] FamCAFC 224
Re Jamie [2013] FamCAFC 110
Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech AHA [1985] UKHL 7
In Re Kevin (Validity of Marriage of Transsexual) [2001] FamCA 1074
Yan & Yan & Anor [2014] FCCA 2519
Thompson & Berg [2014] FamCAFC 73
Teh & Muir [2015] FamCAFC 224

Aon Risk Services & Australian National University [2009] HCA 27

Haset Sali v SPC Ltd [1993] HCA 47

Other Articles Cited:

Patrick Parkinson, Can There Ever Be Affordable Family Law? University of Sydney, March 2017.

Applicant: MR OLDHAM

Respondent: MR AVIS

File Number: SYC 1615 of 2015

Judgment of: Judge Harman

Hearing date: 22 May 2017

Date of Last Submission: 22 May 2017

Delivered at: Parramatta

Delivered on: 22 May 2017

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Livingston

Solicitors for the Applicant: Clive Mills & Associates

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Shaw

Solicitors for the Respondent: Pagano Burlovich Lawyers

ORDERS

1. Dismiss the Application in a Case filed 12 May 2017.

2. Reserve costs of the Respondent in the Application in a Case with respect to the determination of that interlocutory Application to be heard and determined at trial.

3. The parties are to attend a Conciliation Conference with a Registrar at 9:15am on 23 May 2017.

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT PARRAMATTA

SYC 1615 of 2015

MR OLDHAM

Applicant

And

MR AVIS

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. These proceedings arise from a plea for property adjustment relief between litigants, Mr Oldham, the Applicant, and Mr Avis, the Respondent. 

2. I do not intend to be disrespectful to the parties by referring to them by generic titles. The terms “Applicant” and “