FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| SABERTON & SABERTON | [2013] FamCAFC 89 |
| FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – JURISDICTION – Whether a court in the exercise of original jurisdiction has jurisdiction under s 116 of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth) to determine a remitted application – Where the finalisation of all other aspects of the proceedings meant there was no longer an “application pending in a court having jurisdiction under this Act” to satisfy the provisions of s 116 – Held that jurisdiction to make orders pursuant to s 116 of the Assessment Act continues from when the order is made until completion of the judicial process. FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – CHILD SUPPORT ORDERS – Whether it was just and equitable to make a departure order from an administrative assessment with reference to s 117 of the Assessment Act – Where there were no findings made as to matters to which the court must be satisfied before making an order – APPEAL ALLOWED - Order set aside and the matter remitted for rehearing. |
| Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth): s 116, 117, 121, 122, 123, 124 |
| Gyselman & Gyselman (1992) FLC 92-279 Wilde & Ballard (1997) FLC 92-771 |
| APPELLANT: | Ms Saberton |
| RESPONDENT: | Mr Saberton |
| FILE NUMBER: | SYC | 6689 | of | 2010 |
| APPEAL NUMBER: | EA | 115 | of | 2012 |
DATE DELIVERED: | 7 June 2013 |
| PLACE DELIVERED: | Sydney |
| PLACE HEARD: | Sydney |
| JUDGMENT OF: | Ryan, Murphy & Loughnan JJ |
| HEARING DATE: | 22 March 2013 and by way of written submissions received by both parties on 3 April 2013 |
| LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: | Family Court of Australia |
| LOWER COURT JUDGMENT DATE: | 10 August 2012 |
| LOWER COURT MNC: | [2012] FamCA 870 |
REPRESENTATION
| COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT: | Mr Lethbridge SC |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE APPELLANT: | Robyn Sexton & Associates |
| FOR THE RESPONDENT: | Mr Saberton in Person |
Orders
That the application for leave to appeal Order 13 of the orders made by the Honourable Justice Cleary on 10 August 2012 be allowed.
That the appeal be allowed.
That Order 13 of the orders made by the Honourable Justice Cleary on 10 August 2012 be set aside.
That the competing applications for the parties for departure orders under the Child Support Assessment Act 1989 (Cth) be remitted for hearing by a judge other than the Honourable Justice Cleary.
That the application to adduce further evidence in support of the appeal be dismissed.
That the Court grants to the appellant wife a costs certificate in relation to the appeal pursuant to s 9 of the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth), being a certificate stating that, in the opinion of the Court, it would be appropriate for the Attorney-General to authorise a payment under that Act to the appellant in respect of such part as the Attorney-General considers appropriate of the costs incurred by the appellant in relation to the appeal.
The Court grants to each of the parties a costs certificate pursuant to the provisions of s 8 of the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act1981 (Cth) being a certificate that, in the…
Continue reading Saberton & Saberton
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- SABERTON & SABERTON [2013] FamCAFC 89
- Case
- [2013] FamCAFC 89
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Family Court of Australia found that the jurisdiction to make orders pursuant to section 116 of the Assessment Act continues from when the order is made until the completion of the judicial process. Consequently, the court had the authority to address the remitted application. Furthermore, the court determined that it was not just and equitable to make a departure order without findings on the necessary matters, leading to the allowance of the appeal. The order made by Justice Cleary on 10 August 2012 was set aside, and the matter was remitted for rehearing by a different judge.
The court granted the wife leave to appeal and allowed the appeal, setting aside the order in question and remitting the matter for a new hearing. The wife was also granted a costs certificate for the appeal, and each party received a costs certificate for the new trial ordered. These orders reflect the court's decision to ensure that the proceedings were properly managed and that the parties' costs were appropriately considered.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
That the application for leave to appeal Order 13 of the orders made by the Honourable Justice Cleary on 10 August 2012 be allowed.
2.
That the appeal be allowed.
3.
That Order 13 of the orders made by the Honourable Justice Cleary on 10 August 2012 be set aside.
4.
That the competing applications for the parties for departure orders under the Child Support Assessment Act 1989 (Cth) be remitted for hearing by a judge other than the Honourable Justice Cleary.
5.
That the application to adduce further evidence in support of the appeal be dismissed.
6.
That the Court grants to the appellant wife a costs certificate in relation to the appeal pursuant to s 9 of the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth), being a certificate stating that, in the opinion of the Court, it would be appropriate for the Attorney-General to authorise a payment under that Act to the appellant in respect of such part as the Attorney-General considers appropriate of the costs incurred by the appellant in relation to the appeal.
7.
The Court grants to each of the parties a costs certificate pursuant to the provisions of s 8 of the Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981 (Cth) being a certificate that, in the opinion of the Court, it would be appropriate for the Attorney-General to authorise a payment under that Act to each of the parties in respect of the costs incurred by them in relation to the new trial ordered.
8.
Certify for counsel.
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.