Pierson & Romilly - [2025] FedCFamC1F 148

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Pierson & Romilly [2025] FedCFamC1F 148

File number: SYC 9722 of 2024

Judgment of: BOYLE J

Date of judgment: 12 February 2025

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – summary dismissal – no reasonable prospects of success – application dismissed.

Legislation:
Family Law Act 1975

Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth)

Cases cited:
Bigg & Suzi [1998] FamCA 14

Beck & Beck [2004] FamCA 92

Lindon & Commonwealth [1996] HCA 14

Pierson & Romilly [2019] FamCA 259

Pierson & Romilly [2020] FamCAFC 91

Webster & Lampard (1993) 177 CLR 598

Division: Division 1 Family Law

Number of paragraphs: 38

Date of hearing: 7 February 2025

Place: Sydney

Counsel for the Applicant: Self represented

Counsel for the Respondent: Ms Tabbernor

Solicitor for the Respondent: Dezarnaulds Basten
ORDERS

SYC 9722 of 2024

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)

BETWEEN:
MS PIERSON

Applicant

AND:
MR ROMILLY

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

BOYLE J

DATE OF ORDER:

12 FEBRUARY 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The Initiating Application filed 10 December 2024 is dismissed.

THE COURT DIRECTS THAT:
2.By no later than 28 February 2025 the respondent shall file any affidavit material he wishes to rely on in support of his application pursuant to s 102QB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
3.By no later than 28 days after the respondent's compliance with Order 2, the applicant shall file any affidavit material she seeks to rely on in respect of the s 102QB application.
4.The respondent’s costs with respect to the summary dismissal application are reserved until 102QB application is dealt with.
5.The matter is listed on 1 April 2025 with respect to the s 102QB application at 10.00am.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under a pseudonym has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
BOYLE J:

These are settled reasons for judgment that were delivered orally on 12 February 2025. Grammatical and literal errors have been corrected from the transcript for comprehension and legal references have been included.
The wife filed an Application on 6 December 2024. She seeks, amongst other orders, a declaration of exclusive Australian jurisdiction over the Suburb C property. She seeks this on an urgent basis to prevent a French judge from issuing conflicting…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Pierson & Romilly

Details

AGLC: Pierson & Romilly [2025] FedCFamC1F 148
Case: [2025] FedCFamC1F 148
Decision Date: 12 February 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Pierson v Romilly involved a summary dismissal application filed by Ms Pierson against Mr Romilly. The matter was heard in Division 1 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The primary dispute was the summary dismissal of Ms Pierson's application, which she sought under section 102QB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). This section allows for the summary dismissal of an application if the court is satisfied that the application has no reasonable prospects of success.

The legal issues that the court needed to address included whether the application had no reasonable prospects of success and whether the court should exercise its discretion to dismiss the matter summarily. The court considered the evidence presented by both parties and the applicable legal principles under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). Boyle J found that the applicant's claims lacked merit and had no reasonable prospects of success. Consequently, the court dismissed the initiating application on the grounds that it was not likely to succeed.

The court directed that Mr Romilly must file any affidavit material he wished to rely on in support of his application by 28 February 2025. Ms Pierson was then required to file any affidavit material she sought to rely on by 28 days after the respondent's compliance with the first order. The respondent's costs regarding the summary dismissal application were reserved until the section 102QB application was dealt with. The matter was listed for further hearing on 1 April 2025 at 10.00 am to address the section 102QB application.

Orders

Orders of the court

SYC 9722 of 2024

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)

BETWEEN:

MS PIERSON

Applicant

AND:

MR ROMILLY

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

BOYLE J

DATE OF ORDER:

12 FEBRUARY 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The Initiating Application filed 10 December 2024 is dismissed.

THE COURT DIRECTS THAT:

2. By no later than 28 February 2025 the respondent shall file any affidavit material he wishes to rely on in support of his application pursuant to s 102QB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

3. By no later than 28 days after the respondent's compliance with Order 2, the applicant shall file any affidavit material she seeks to rely on in respect of the s 102QB application.

4. The respondent’s costs with respect to the summary dismissal application are reserved until 102QB application is dealt with.

5. The matter is listed on 1 April 2025 with respect to the s 102QB application at 10.00am.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

File number:	SYC 9722 of 2024
Judgment of:	BOYLE J
Date of judgment:	12 February 2025
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – summary dismissal – no reasonable prospects of success – application dismissed.
Legislation:	Family Law Act 1975 Foreign Judgments Act 1991 (Cth)
Cases cited:	Bigg & Suzi [1998] FamCA 14 Beck & Beck [2004] FamCA 92 Lindon & Commonwealth [1996] HCA 14 Pierson & Romilly [2019] FamCA 259 Pierson & Romilly [2020] FamCAFC 91 Webster & Lampard (1993) 177 CLR 598
Division:	Division 1 Family Law
Number of paragraphs:	38
Date of hearing:	7 February 2025
Place:	Sydney
Counsel for the Applicant:	Self represented
Counsel for the Respondent:	Ms Tabbernor
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Dezarnaulds Basten

SYC 9722 of 2024
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN:	MS PIERSON Applicant
AND:	MR ROMILLY Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	BOYLE J
DATE OF ORDER:	12 FEBRUARY 2025