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

2010

APPEAL NUMBER:

SOA

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

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.
The appellant 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 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.
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.
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

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.
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.
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…

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 PULUKURI & PULUKURI

Details

AGLC: PULUKURI & PULUKURI [2014] FamCAFC 40
Case: [2014] FamCAFC 40
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Full Court of the Family Court of Australia in Melbourne heard an appeal by Mr Pulukuri against orders made by the Family Court of Australia. Mrs Pulukuri, the respondent, was represented by herself while Mr Pulukuri appeared in person. The appeal related to the dismissal of the case due to Mr Pulukuri's failure to file a summary of argument and list of authorities, as well as an amended notice of appeal. The appellant had also requested an extension of time due to planned overseas travel during his annual leave.

The legal issues before the court involved whether to grant the appellant's request for an extension of time and whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the appellant's failure to comply with earlier orders of the Appeal Registrar. The court considered the appellant's history of non-compliance, the fact that the parties were negotiating a settlement, and the appellant's overseas travel plans.

The court found that the appellant had not provided sufficient justification for the requested extension and that the arrangements for the hearing of the appeal should not be made around the appellant's annual leave. The Full Court decided to grant a short extension of time for the appellant to file and serve his summary of argument and amended notice of appeal, up until 18 April 2014. If these documents were not filed by that date, the appeal would be dismissed. The respondent was directed to file her summary of argument within 28 days of the appellant's submission, and the appeal was to be listed for hearing in the June/July 2014 sittings of the Full Court in Melbourne.

In summary, the Full Court granted the appellant a short extension of time to file his summary of argument and amended notice of appeal, with the condition that if these documents were not filed by 18 April 2014, the appeal would be dismissed. The respondent was directed to file her summary of argument within 28 days of the appellant's submission, and the appeal was to be listed for hearing in the June/July 2014 sittings of the Full Court in Melbourne.

Orders