Rothman & Rothman (No 2) - [2025] FedCFamC1F 101

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Rothman & Rothman (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1F 101

File number: SYC 8245 of 2024

Judgment of: SCHONELL J

Date of judgment: 21 February 2025

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Interlocutory orders – Where the mother has retained the children in Country B contrary to the orders of the Court– Where the mother informs the Court that she will not return the children to Australia – Where the mother has not complied with court orders and has retained the children in Country B unilaterally – Where the mothers non-compliance with an order of the Court invokes Pt 10.6 - Default of the Rules – Orders made for the interlocutory relief contained in the mother’s Initiating Application to be dismissed.

Legislation: Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) Pt 10.6 rr 10.25, 10.26, 10.27

Cases cited: Rothman &Rothman [2025] FedCFamC1F 40

Division: Division 1 First Instance

Number of paragraphs: 10

Date of hearing: 21 February 2025

Place: Sydney

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Francis

Solicitor for the Applicant: O’Sullivan Legal

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Blackah

Solicitor for the Respondent: Tsui Lawyers
ORDERS

SYC 8245 of 2024

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)

BETWEEN:
MS ROTHMAN

Applicant

AND:
MR ROTHMAN

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

SCHONELL J

DATE OF ORDER:

21 FEBRUARY 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The interim relief set out in the mother’s Initiating Application sealed 21 October 2024 is dismissed.
2.The matter is referred to a registrar for further directions.

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 the pseudonym Rothman & Rothman has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
SCHONELL J:

On 23 January 2025 the Court heard the parties’ competing interlocutory applications then listed for hearing before the Court. On 30 January 2025 I delivered reasons in relation to the applications (Rothman & Rothman [2024] FedCFamC1F 40 (the “Reasons”)).
In my Reasons, I recorded the following:
1Before the Court are the parties’ competing interlocutory applications for parenting and financial orders.
2The parenting proceedings relate to the parties’ two children, [X] born […] 2017, and [Y] born […] 2020 (collectively “the children”). The children have resided with their mother in [Country B]…

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 Rothman & Rothman (No 2)

Details

AGLC: Rothman & Rothman (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1F 101
Case: [2025] FedCFamC1F 101
Decision Date: 21 February 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia heard an application by Ms Rothman for interim relief in a family law matter concerning the custody and care of her children with Mr Rothman. Ms Rothman sought an order for the return of the children to Australia, who she had retained in Country B in breach of prior court orders. In response, Mr Rothman argued that Ms Rothman had not complied with the court’s orders and had no intention of returning the children to Australia. Mr Rothman sought the dismissal of Ms Rothman's application for interim relief and argued that Ms Rothman's actions invoked Part 10.6 – Default of the Rules. The court was required to determine whether Ms Rothman's conduct warranted the dismissal of her application and what further steps should be taken in the matter.

The court found that Ms Rothman had not complied with prior court orders and had unilaterally retained the children in Country B. Her conduct was found to invoke Part 10.6 – Default of the Rules. The court concluded that it was not in the best interests of the children for the interim relief sought by Ms Rothman to be granted. The court also found that Ms Rothman's failure to comply with prior orders and her unilateral retention of the children in Country B demonstrated a disregard for the court’s authority and the rights of Mr Rothman. As a result, the court dismissed the interim relief sought by Ms Rothman and referred the matter to a registrar for further directions.

The court ordered that the interim relief set out in Ms Rothman's initiating application, sealed on 21 October 2024, be dismissed. The matter was referred to a registrar for further directions to determine the next steps in the proceedings. The form of the order was subject to the entry in the Court’s records, and the Reasons for judgment could be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors or to record a variation to the order. This decision highlights the importance of compliance with court orders in family law matters and the consequences of unilateral actions that disregard the court’s authority.

Orders

Orders of the court

SYC 8245 of 2024

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)

BETWEEN:

MS ROTHMAN

Applicant

AND:

MR ROTHMAN

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

SCHONELL J

DATE OF ORDER:

21 FEBRUARY 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The interim relief set out in the mother’s Initiating Application sealed 21 October 2024 is dismissed.

2. The matter is referred to a registrar for further directions.

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 8245 of 2024
Judgment of:	SCHONELL J
Date of judgment:	21 February 2025
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Interlocutory orders – Where the mother has retained the children in Country B contrary to the orders of the Court– Where the mother informs the Court that she will not return the children to Australia – Where the mother has not complied with court orders and has retained the children in Country B unilaterally – Where the mothers non-compliance with an order of the Court invokes Pt 10.6 - Default of the Rules – Orders made for the interlocutory relief contained in the mother’s Initiating Application to be dismissed.
Legislation:	Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) Pt 10.6 rr 10.25, 10.26, 10.27
Cases cited:	Rothman &Rothman [2025] FedCFamC1F 40
Division:	Division 1 First Instance
Number of paragraphs:	10
Date of hearing:	21 February 2025
Place:	Sydney
Counsel for the Applicant:	Mr Francis
Solicitor for the Applicant:	O’Sullivan Legal
Counsel for the Respondent:	Mr Blackah
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Tsui Lawyers

SYC 8245 of 2024
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN:	MS ROTHMAN Applicant
AND:	MR ROTHMAN Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	SCHONELL J
DATE OF ORDER:	21 FEBRUARY 2025