PULUKURI & PULUKURI

[2014] FamCAFC 40

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

PULUKURI & PULUKURI [2014] FamCAFC 40

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – Consideration of dismissal of the appeal – Where the appellant has not filed a summary of argument and seeks an extension of time – Where the parties are negotiating but the appellant seeks an extension of time because of overseas travel planned during his annual leave – Arrangements for the hearing of the appeal are not to be made around the appellant’s annual leave – Short extension of time granted.

Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)

APPELLANT: Mr Pulukuri

RESPONDENT: Mrs Pulukuri

FILE NUMBER: MLC 8738 of 2010

APPEAL NUMBER: SOA 17 of 2013

DATE DELIVERED: 5 March 2014

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Thackray, Strickland & Ainslie-Wallace JJ

HEARING DATE: 5 March 2014

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Family Court of Australia

LOWER COURT JUDGMENT DATE: 4 March 2013

LOWER COURT MNC: [2013] FamCA 132

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT: In person

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: In person

Orders

1. The time in which the appellant has to file and serve his summary of argument (and list of authorities, if any) be extended until 18 April 2014.

2. The appellant file and serve an amended notice of appeal setting out grounds of appeal in proper form on or before 18 April 2014.

3. In the event the appellant does not file and serve his summary of argument and amended notice of appeal on or before 18 April 2014, the appeal shall stand dismissed.

4. The respondent file and serve her summary of argument (and list of authorities, if any) within 28 days of service of the appellant’s summary of argument.

5. Subject to any direction of the Senior Judge of the Appeal Division, the Regional Appeals Registrar is requested to list the appeal in the Full Court sittings in Melbourne the week commencing 30 June 2014.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Pulukuri & Pulukuri has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

THE FULL COURT OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

Appeal Number: SOA 17 of 2013
File Number: MLC 8738 of 2010

Mr Pulukuri

Appellant

And

Mrs Pulukuri

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

THACKRAY J

1. Before the Full Court this morning, listed at the direction of the Appeal Registrar, is the Notice of Appeal filed on 2 April 2013 by Mr Pulukuri, to which the respondent is Mrs Pulukiri. 

2. The matter has been listed for consideration of dismissal of the appeal pursuant to the provisions of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth), in circumstances where the appellant has failed to comply with earlier orders of the Appeal Registrar in relation to the preparation of this matter for hearing by the Full Court.

3. It is worthy of note that this couple separated as long ago as November 2007, and that the orders the subject of the appeal were made a year ago.  It is also worthy of note that immediately upon the filing of the appeal on 2 April 2013, the Appeal Registrar wrote to the appellant informing him of a number of things.  One was that he may wish to seek legal advice as to the merits of making an application to adduce further evidence in the appeal, and the Appeal Registrar provided him with information in that regard.  The letter also said that the appellant may wish to seek advice as to amending his grounds of appeal to more clearly articulate the errors that he asserted had been made by the trial judge in determining the case. 

4. The matter came before the Appeal Registrar on 18 June 2013.  Orders were made for the appellant to file a summary of argument by 6 August 2013.  Orders were also made in relation to the filing of appeal books.  The appeal books were not filed by the time allocated, which was 24 July 2013.  They were finally filed in a satisfactory manner on 30 August 2013, with what was obviously considerable assistance from the Appeal Registrar.  The time within which the appellant had to file his summary of argument was extended until 25 October 2013, but it was not filed within that extended period.   

5. Subsequently, the Appeal Registrar has been corresponding with the appellant, but the appellant has simply failed to respond to any of the correspondence.  In those circumstances, the Appeal Registrar has properly listed the matter before us today for consideration of dismissal of the appeal. 

6. A few days ago, the Court received a letter, co-signed by the appellant and the respondent advising that they had been attempting to settle the matter outside the Court.  The letter said, “We are close to a mutually agreeable outcome”.  A request was then made by the appellant for a further extension of time until the end of 2014 to accommodate his travel plans which would take him out of the country from April to September 2014. 

7. We have, this morning, been advised that the appellant will not, in fact, be leaving Australia until around 18 or 20 April.  The appellant also advises that his travel plans are complex arrangements that have been made to accommodate his annual leave.  We are also told that the appellant has been seeking legal advice in relation to the conduct of the appeal. 

8. The respondent confirms this morning that indeed there have been some discussions with a view to a settlement of the matter.  She says that those discussions hang on one particular issue that need not concern us now.  But both parties indicate a willingness to continue their discussions and to do so in the near future; and they certainly have plenty of time prior to the appellant’s proposed departure from this country to resolve the matter. 

9. It goes without saying that there has been considerable inconvenience and expense associated with the appellant’s failure to comply with directions.  Whilst the appellant and the respondent themselves may have agreed to a proposed course of action, they failed to involve the Court in the discussion in circumstances where the Court has an interest in ensuring matters are concluded in a timely fashion.  It is also a matter of concern to “read between the lines” of the respondent’s remarks this morning concerning the reasons for her apparent cooperation with the appellant’s proposal to postpone resolution of the matter. 

10. The appellant’s request would involve arrangements being made with a view to this matter coming on for hearing in the sittings of the Full Court commencing on 10 November 2014.  But the respondent’s desire – understandably, given the long delay already – is for the matter to be concluded as soon as it can conveniently be ready for hearing. 

11. Speaking for myself, it ought be apparent that the appellant has had more than enough time to prepare this appeal, and he may count himself lucky if the appeal is not dismissed today.  In my view, it would intolerable for arrangements for the hearing of this appeal to be made around the appellant’s annual leave arrangements.  Instead, I consider the appellant should be given a modest amount of time, up until his proposed date of departure from Australia, to file and serve his summary of argument. 

12. In my view, he should also file an amended Notice of Appeal.  Reference to the grounds of appeal – with all due respect to the appellant who does not have legal training – would indicate that they are not proper grounds of appeal.  It would be embarrassing for the respondent to attempt to deal with them, and I note the Appeal Registrar drew attention to this issue almost the minute the appeal was filed last year. 

13. In those circumstances, the orders that I would make would be that the time in which the appellant had to file his summary of argument (and list of authorities, if any) be extended to 18 April 2014.  The appellant shall file and serve an amended Notice of Appeal setting out grounds of appeal in proper form on or before 18 April 2014.  In the event the summary of argument or amended Notice of Appeal are not filed on or before 18 April 2014, the Notice of Appeal filed on 2 April 2013 shall stand dismissed.  The respondent shall file and serve a summary of argument (and list of authorities, if any) within 28 days of service of the appellant’s summary of argument.  The Appeal Registrar is requested to list this matter for hearing in the June/July 2014 sittings of the Full Court in Melbourne.

STRICKLAND J

1. I agree with the reasons given by the presiding judge and the orders proposed by him.

AINSLIE-WALLACE J

1. I too agree with the reasons given by the presiding judge and the orders he proposes.

I certify that the preceding fifteen (15) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Full Court delivered on 5 March 2014.

Associate: 

Date:  19 March 2014