SABINA & SABINA

[2015] FamCA 513

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SABINA & SABINA [2015] FamCA 513

FAMILY COURT – PROCEDURAL – where one party has failed to attend – where party was clearly aware of the court date

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Sabina

RESPONDENT: Mr Sabina

FILE NUMBER: SYC 5445 of 2014

DATE DELIVERED: 15 June 2015

PLACE DELIVERED: Parramatta

PLACE HEARD: Parramatta

JUDGMENT OF: Hannam J

HEARING DATE: 15 June 2015

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Gersbach

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Brown of Mark Brown & Associates

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT:

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:

Orders

1. That the matter be dealt with on an ex parte or undefended basis.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Sabina & Sabina has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT PARRAMATTA

FILE NUMBER:

Ms Sabina

Applicant

And

Mr Sabina

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. In my view it is appropriate to deal with this matter on an ex parte or undefended basis.

2. The Application in a Case was filed on 2 April 2015.  It was served upon the Respondent husband in accordance with the affidavit filed by Mr B, Process Server, and was served on 28 April 2015.

3. The matter was listed initially before the Court on 19 May 2015, and was then adjourned to a Registrar’s list last Thursday, 11 June 2015 for directions in relation to the potential transfer to a duty judge.

4. A further affidavit of service was served in respect of that court event.

5. The Respondent was again notified then by a letter indicating that the matter had been adjourned to today to go before the duty judge.

6. Shortly prior to coming onto the Bench, there was contact made with my Chambers by the Respondent husband indicating that he was at hospital with his new partner.  He was told to forward a medical certificate. That has not yet been received, but in any event, the attendance at the hospital is said to be related to the birth of the Respondent father’s new partner’s child.  There is no indication that he instructed anybody to appear on his behalf.  Indeed his previous solicitors no longer act for him.

7. In all of the circumstances he has given no indication that he may not be here today and I propose dealing with the matter.

I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Hannam delivered on 15 June 2015.

Associate:

Date:  6 July 2015