Ruane and Bachmann-Ruane and Ors (Accrued Jurisdiction)
Case
•
[2012] FamCA 369
•22 May 2012
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Ruane and Bachmann-Ruane and Ors (Accrued Jurisdiction) [2012] FamCA 369
[2012] FamCA 369
22 May 2012
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The matter before Murphy J of the Family Court of Australia concerned an application by the wife, Ms. Ruane, and the husband, Mr. Bachmann-Ruane, and other parties. The core of the dispute revolved around an "Application in a Case" filed by the wife on 11 May 2011, which was subsequently dismissed. The court also addressed an earlier "Application in a Case" filed by the husband on 2 February 2010, which was adjourned for a hearing date to be fixed.
The primary legal issue before the court was the determination of the wife's application filed on 11 May 2011. The court was also required to make directions for the further progress of the husband's application filed on 2 February 2010, and to consider applications for costs.
Murphy J ordered the dismissal of the wife's application filed on 11 May 2011. The husband's application filed on 2 February 2010 was adjourned for the fixing of a hearing date. Directions were made for the listing of the matter before a Registrar or Cronin J for further progress, and for the making of applications for costs by way of written submissions, with provisions for oral submissions if required. The court also provided a mechanism for parties to communicate any agreed orders or directions.
The primary legal issue before the court was the determination of the wife's application filed on 11 May 2011. The court was also required to make directions for the further progress of the husband's application filed on 2 February 2010, and to consider applications for costs.
Murphy J ordered the dismissal of the wife's application filed on 11 May 2011. The husband's application filed on 2 February 2010 was adjourned for the fixing of a hearing date. Directions were made for the listing of the matter before a Registrar or Cronin J for further progress, and for the making of applications for costs by way of written submissions, with provisions for oral submissions if required. The court also provided a mechanism for parties to communicate any agreed orders or directions.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
-
Family Law
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Costs
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Daily & Daily [2023] FedCFamC1F 222
Cases Citing This Decision
4
Farro and Goff and Ors
[2019] FamCA 959
WENTWORTH and Hamilton & Anor
[2014] FamCA 533
Noll & Noll and Anor
[2013] FamCAFC 24
Cases Cited
19
Statutory Material Cited
1
Ruane and Bachmann-Ruane
[2009] FamCA 1100
Baxter v Commissioners of Taxation (NSW)
[1907] HCA 76
Crouch v Commissioner for Railways (Qld)
[1985] HCA 69