Pillai and Doshi - [2012] FamCAFC 173

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

PILLAI & DOSHI

[2012] FamCAFC 173

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – CHILDREN – where the appellant husband relied on numerous grounds of appeal which were found to be without merit, save for a ground directed to an order restraining the husband from filing further applications until he complied with other orders – appeal allowed against that Order – Order set aside – written submissions for costs ordered
FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – PROPERTY – where the appellant husband relied on numerous grounds of appeal which were found to be without merit, save for a ground directed to an order which required the husband to return to the wife a necklace and bracelet – appeal allowed against that Order – Order amended – written submissions for costs ordered

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

Abalos v Australian Postal Commission (1990) 171 CLR 167
Bennett v Bennett (2001) FLC 93-088
Biltoft and Biltoft (1995) FLC 92-614; 19 Fam LR 39
Clauson and Clauson (1995) FLC 92-595; (1994) 18 Fam LR 693
Gronow v Gronow (1979) 144 CLR 513
Hickey and Hickey and the Attorney-General for the Commonwealth of Australia (Intervener)(2003) FLC 93-143; 30 Fam LR 355
In the Marriage of Rolfe (1977) 25 ALR 217; (1979) FLC 90-629; (1977) 5 Fam LR 146
Johnson v Johnson (1997) FLC 92-764
Norbis v Norbis (1986) 161 CLR 513
Penfold v Penfold (1980) 144 CLR 311; (1980) FLC 90-800; (1980) 5 Fam LR 579
Prince and Prince; General Credits Australia Limited (Intevenor); A-G for the State of Queensland (Intervening); A-G for the Commonwealth of Australia (Intervening) (1984) FLC 91-501
Re F: Litigants in Person Guidelines (2001) FLC 93-072
State Rail Authority of NSW v Earthline Constructions Pty Ltd (in liq) (1999) 160 ALR 588

APPELLANT:

Mr Pillai

RESPONDENT:

Ms Doshi

FILE NUMBER:

DGC

664

2007

APPEAL NUMBERS:	SOA	22	of	2011
SOA	30	of	2011
SOA	51	of	2011
SOA	52	of	2011

DATE DELIVERED:

25 October 2012

PLACE DELIVERED:

Canberra

PLACE HEARD:

Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF:

Bryant CJ, Finn and Johnston JJ

HEARING DATE:

3 October 2011

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:

Family Court of Australia

LOWER COURT JUDGMENT DATES:

3 February 2011

8 March 2011
6 July 2011
26 July 2011

LOWER COURT MNCS:

[2011] FamCA 36
[2011] FamCA 165
[2011] FamCA 523
[2011] FamCA 594

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT:

In person

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Ms McCreadie

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Perry Weston

Order made on 3 October 2011

The appellant’s application in an appeal filed 16 September 2011 which sought to admit fresh evidence in appeal number SOA 22 of 2011 is dismissed.

Orders made on 25 October 2012

Orders in relation to appeal SOA 22 of 2011 (the appeal against the parenting orders made on 3 February 2011)

The appeal against Order 21 of the orders made on 3 February 2011 be allowed and that order be set aside.
The appeal be otherwise dismissed.
(a) Within 28 days of the…

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 Pillai and Doshi

Details

AGLC: PILLAI & DOSHI [2012] FamCAFC 173
Case: [2012] FamCAFC 173
Decision Date: 25 October 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Pillai and Doshi involved four appeals brought by Mr Pillai (the husband) against orders made by Young J in the Family Court of Australia. The first appeal (SOA 22/2011) was against parenting orders made by Young J on 3 February 2011, the second appeal (SOA 30/2011) was against property settlement and child support orders also made by Young J on 8 March 2011, the third appeal (SOA 51/2011) was against an order for costs made by Young J on 6 July 2011, and the fourth appeal (SOA 52/2011) was against another order for costs made by Young J on 26 July 2011. The appeals were heard by Bryant CJ, Finn and Johnston JJ of the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia. The husband was self-represented, while the wife was represented by counsel. The Full Court allowed the appeal against the parenting orders in part, setting aside the order that the husband be restrained from filing further applications until he complied with other orders. The appeal against the property settlement and child support orders was allowed in part, with the order requiring the husband to return the wife's jewellery set aside. The appeals against the costs orders were dismissed, with each party bearing their own costs in relation to the appeals. The Full Court ordered that the wife file and serve brief written submissions in relation to the costs of the appeal and whether, in the event that an order for costs was to be made against the husband, such costs should be paid prior to any distribution of monies to be made to the husband pursuant to the orders of 8 March 2011.

Orders