OSTEN & OSTEN

[2015] FamCA 445

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

OSTEN & OSTEN [2015] FamCA 445

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Access to inspect court file – leave to inspect a court file of another concluded proceeding for the purposes of these proceedings – party with proper interest – rule 24.13 of the Family Law Rules (2004) – application granted.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Osten

RESPONDENT: Mr Osten

FILE NUMBER: MLC 8835 of 2013

DATE DELIVERED: 26 March 2015

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Johns J

HEARING DATE: 26 March 2015

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Strum

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Marshalls & Dent

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: No appearance

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: No appearance

Orders

IT IS ORDERED:

1. That pursuant to Rule 24.13 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) the parties to the proceedings be at liberty to search, inspect and copy the Court file relating to Family Court proceedings number MLC 4991 of 2011 between Mr Becker and Ms Becker (“the Becker file”) for the sole purpose of the issues in dispute in these proceedings.

2. That the parties be and are hereby restrained from using the information in the Becker file for any purpose other than the purpose of these proceedings.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Osten & Osten 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 MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: MLC 8835 of 2013

Ms Osten

Applicant

And

Mr Osten

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. I have before me today an application in a case filed on behalf of the wife.  That document was filed on 16 March 2015.  It is supported by an affidavit of the wife filed the same day. 

2. The application seeks an order pursuant to r 24.13 of the Family Law Rules that the parties to the current proceedings have liberty to search, inspect and copy the court file relating to the proceedings between Mr Becker and Ms Becker for the purpose of these current proceedings.

3. Further, there is an order sought that the parties to these proceedings be restrained from using any information obtained in the Becker file for any purpose other than the purpose of these current proceedings. 

4. The parties in these proceedings are the wife, Ms Osten, who is aged 42. Her occupation is home duties.  The husband is Mr Osten.  He is aged 42. He is a manager.  The parties have three children.  There are pending financial property proceedings before the Court. 

5. The matter has recently had a first day of hearing before me.  This issue of inspection of the file in the matter of Becker was raised at that mention hearing, and subsequent to that hearing the wife has filed this application. 

6. The application has been served on the solicitors for the husband.  Exhibit A1 is the letter of service, which indicates that the documents were served on 16 March 2015.  In addition, the application has been served on both parties to the Becker proceedings.  The wife in those proceedings is Ms Becker and I have as exhibit A2 to the wife’s affidavit a letter from solicitors acting on Ms Becker’s behalf dated 18 March 2015 confirming that she does not oppose the release of the file for the stated purposes. 

7. The husband in the Becker proceedings is represented by Ms Susan Snider, and she has also forwarded a letter to the wife’s solicitors dated 19 March 2015, again indicating that Mr Becker neither consents to nor opposes the orders sought on behalf of the wife. 

8. It is evident from the affidavit material filed on behalf of the wife in support of her application that on the face of a judgment delivered by Bennett J in the Becker proceedings, there is an intersection between the financial affairs of the family in the current proceedings and those of the Becker family. 

9. On the face of it, it would appear that certain entities which came within the sphere of the Becker proceedings are entities in which the husband in the current proceedings has an interest or, indeed, may have control.  The financial statement that has been filed by the husband in these proceedings, which is a document filed on 22 November 2013, does little to shed light in terms of the extent of the husband’s legal or equitable interests or financial resources.  In broad terms, the assets disclosed by him have an estimated value of, I think, $2.37 million, whilst he discloses liabilities in excess of $3 million. 

10. It is evident from that material that further inquiry is necessary.  It is also evident from the judgment of Bennett J that it is appropriate that there be further inquiries as to the intersection between the Becker and the Osten interests.  I am satisfied that the parties to these proceedings are persons who have a proper interest in the information contained within the Becker family Court file, and in circumstances where there is no opposition to the orders sought by the wife in her current application, I am satisfied that it is appropriate to make orders in terms she seeks. 

11. Therefore I will make orders as sought on behalf of the wife in her application in a case filed 16 March 2015. Those orders will be engrossed by the Court.

I certify that the preceding eleven (11) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Johns delivered on 26 March 2015.

Associate: 

Date:  26 March 2015