FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| RADTKE & PAGANO | [2016] FamCA 784 |
| ||||
| APPLICANT: | Ms Radtke |
| RESPONDENT: | Mr Pagano |
| FILE NUMBER: | PAC | 2339 | of | 2016 |
| DATE DELIVERED: | 16 September 2016 |
| PLACE DELIVERED: | Parramatta |
| PLACE HEARD: | Parramatta |
| JUDGMENT OF: | Foster J |
| HEARING DATE: | 13 September 2016 |
REPRESENTATION
| SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: | In Person |
Amended pursuant to rule 17.02 of the Family Law Rules 2004
Orders
The marriage between the applicant Ms Radtke and the respondent Mr Pagano conducted at Suburb D, New South Wales on 23 August 2013 be declared void and a nullity.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Radtke & Pagano has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).
| FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT PARRAMATTA |
FILE NUMBER: PAC 2339 of 2016
| Ms Radtke |
Applicant
And
| Mr Pagano |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
The application of the wife before the Court for a declaration of nullity of marriage is made pursuant to section 51 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), and that provision provides that:
An application under this Act for a degree of nullity of marriage shall be based on the ground that the marriage is void.
The grounds on which a marriage is void is set out in section 23B of the Marriage Act 1961 (Cth), which provides, relevantly, as follows:
(1) A marriage to which this Division applies that takes place after the commencement of section 13 of the Marriage Amendment Act 1985 is void where:
(a) either of the parties is, at the time of the marriage, lawfully married to some other person;
(b) the parties are within a prohibited relationship;
(c) by reason of section 48 the marriage is not a valid marriage;
(d) the consent of either of the parties is not a real consent because:
(i) it was obtained by duress or fraud;
(ii) that party is mistaken as to the identity of the other party or as to the nature of the ceremony performed; or
(iii) that party is mentally incapable of understanding the nature and effect of the marriage ceremony; or
(e) either…
Continue reading Radtke and Pagano
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Radtke and Pagano [2016] FamCA 784
- Case
- [2016] FamCA 784
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the marriage between Ms Radtke and Mr Pagano was valid at its inception, or if it was void ab initio.
Foster J declared the marriage void and a nullity. The specific grounds for this declaration are not detailed in the provided text, but the outcome signifies that the court found the marriage to be legally invalid from its commencement.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
The marriage between the applicant Ms Radtke and the respondent Mr Pagano conducted at Suburb D, New South Wales on 23 August 2013 be declared void and a nullity.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.
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.