Saso & Saso (No 3)

Case [2024] FedCFamC1A 113


FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

(DIVISION 1) APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Saso & Saso (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC1A 113

Appeal from: Saso & Saso (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC2F 145
Appeal number: NAA 53 of 2024
File number: BRC 881 of 2021
Judgment of: TREE J
Date of judgment: 12 July 2024
Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – Property – Summary dismissal – Where the appellant failed to comply with procedural orders – Where only days before the appeal hearing the appellant filed an Application in an Appeal seeking an extension of time to file her Summary of Argument – Where the practical consequence of any extension would be the adjournment of the appeal hearing and result in a clear prejudice to the respondent – Where the appellant’s grounds of appeal are a repetition of arguments she advanced in a previous appeal, or are misconceived – Where no viable challenge to the primary judge’s orders can be discerned – Application in an Appeal dismissed – Appeal summarily dismissed – Costs ordered in a fixed sum.
Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 79, 102NA, 102NB

Federal Circuit and Family Court of AustraliaAct 2021 (Cth) ss 67, 68

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) rr 13.45, 15.06

Cases cited:

Bethke & Bethke (2019) FLC 93-906; [2019] FamCAFC 106

De Winter v De Winter (1979) 23 ALR 211

Gallo v Dawson (1990) 93 ALR 479; [1990] HCA 30

House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40

Kennon & Kennon (1997) FLC 92-757; [1997] FamCA 27

Saso & Saso (No 2) [2023] FedCFamC1A 179

Saso & Saso (No 2) [2023] FedCFamC2F 1196

Saso & Saso [2023] FedCFamC1A 65

Number of paragraphs: 61
Date of hearing: 25 June 2024
Place: Cairns (via video link)
The Appellant: Litigant in person
Counsel for the Respondent: Ms Dart
Solicitor for the Respondent: C & C Law

ORDERS

NAA 53 of 2024
BRC 881 of 2021

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
DIVISION 1 APPELLATE JURISDICTION

BETWEEN:

MS SASO

Appellant

AND:

MR SASO

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

TREE J

DATE OF ORDER:

25 JUNE 2024

ON 25 JUNE 2024 THE COURT ORDERED THAT:

1.The Application in an Appeal filed 21 June 2024 is dismissed.

2.The Amended Notice of Appeal filed 2 April 2024 is dismissed.

3.The appellant is to pay the respondent’s costs in the sum of $5,300 within 28 days.

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).

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Saso & Saso (No 3) has been…

Continue reading Saso & Saso (No 3)

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Saso & Saso (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC1A 113
Case
[2024] FedCFamC1A 113
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Saso & Saso (No 3) was a family law appeal where the appellant, Ms Saso, sought to challenge the primary judge’s orders concerning property distribution. The respondent, Mr Saso, opposed the appeal, arguing that it was not viable. The matter was heard in the Family Court of Australia’s appellate division.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the appellant had complied with procedural requirements, the merits of the arguments presented, and the potential impact of any extension of time on the proceedings. Specifically, the court had to determine if Ms Saso’s failure to adhere to procedural orders and the belated application for an extension of time warranted dismissal of the appeal. Additionally, the court needed to assess the viability of the grounds of appeal, which were largely a repetition of arguments from a previous appeal or appeared misconceived.

Tree J dismissed the appellant's application for an extension of time, finding that it would result in an adjournment of the appeal hearing and cause clear prejudice to the respondent. The court concluded that the appellant’s grounds of appeal were either a repetition of previous arguments or misconceived, and no viable challenge to the primary judge’s orders could be discerned. Consequently, the appeal was summarily dismissed, and costs were ordered in a fixed sum of $5,300, payable within 28 days.

The court's decision underscores the importance of compliance with procedural orders and the necessity for appellants to present viable grounds of appeal. The dismissal of both the application for an extension of time and the appeal highlights the court's firm stance on procedural fairness and the efficient use of judicial resources.

Orders

Orders of the court

NAA 53 of 2024

BRC 881 of 2021

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

DIVISION 1 APPELLATE JURISDICTION

BETWEEN:

MS SASO

Appellant

AND:

MR SASO

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

TREE J

DATE OF ORDER:

25 JUNE 2024

ON 25 JUNE 2024 THE COURT ORDERED THAT:

1. The Application in an Appeal filed 21 June 2024 is dismissed.

2. The Amended Notice of Appeal filed 2 April 2024 is dismissed.

3. The appellant is to pay the respondent’s costs in the sum of $5,300 within 28 days.

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).

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.