Scott & Munayallan (No 14)
[2023] FedCFamC1F 772
•1 September 2023
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Scott & Munayallan (No 14) [2023] FedCFamC1F 772
File number(s): SYC 59 of 2010 Judgment of: ALDRIDGE J Date of judgment: 1 September 2023 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – INTERIM HEARING – Application seeking a review of a registrar’s order rejecting a prior application for filing and other orders – Where the appellant did not appear – Application dismissed. Legislation: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 198G, 471B Division: Division 1 First Instance Number of paragraphs: 13 Date of hearing: 1 September 2023 Place: Sydney The Applicant: No appearance The First Respondent: No appearance The Second Respondent: No appearance The Third Respondent: No appearance ORDERS
SYC 59 of 2010 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MR MATTEN
Applicant
AND: MS SCOTT
First Respondent
MS MUNAYALLAN
Second Respondent
MR SCOTT (and another named in the Schedule)
Third Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
ALDRIDGE J
DATE OF ORDER:
1 SEPTEMBER 2023
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The Application in a Proceeding filed on 22 August 2023 is dismissed.
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).
Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish 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 a pseudonym has been approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
ALDRIDGE J:
This matter has been listed for hearing of Mr Matten’s application for a review of a registrar’s decision today at 2.30 pm. There is no appearance by any party notwithstanding the matter has been called outside the Court on three occasions.
The non-appearance of the applicant is a sufficient basis to dismiss the application. However, there are a number of further difficulties.
The application seeks to review a registrar’s decision rejecting an Application in a Proceeding Mr Matten sought to file on 21 August 2023. That application was filed in circumstances where Henderson J had published a number of judgments recently finally disposing of all the matters in issue at a trial level. Mr Matten has lodged two appeals against those decisions which were summarily dismissed this morning.
The application that was sought to be filed but was rejected, sought as Order 1(a) that the orders made by Henderson J on 11 August 2023 be stayed until Appeal No. NAA 217 of 2023 is heard. The appeal was dismissed this morning and there is no utility in the order.
Order 1(b) seeks for the return of proceedings to the NSW Supreme Court that had been transferred from it. Given that the matters have now been finalised, that is a matter for appeal rather than a fresh application if there is anything in the point.
Order 1(d) (there is no Order 1(c)) is impossible to understand.
Order 3 seeks the appointment of a legal guardian for one of the other parties. Given that the proceedings are concluded, there is not point to such an order.
Similarly, there is no point to Order 5, pursuant to which Mr Matten seeks leave to appear for one of the corporate parties in liquidation in these proceedings or an order under s 471B of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (“Corporations Act”) granting leave to commence proceedings against a corporation in liquidation (Order 6).
Order 7 seeks the disqualification of Henderson J. That is a matter for her Honour or an appeals bench and not another judge at first instance.
Order 8 seeks an application that the questions of remuneration, the company’s costs and expenses be dealt with in the Federal Court of Australia. They are the subject of orders by Henderson J and in the absence of an appeal will stand. There is no basis for sending anything to the Federal Court.
Therefore the review of the registrar’s decision is doomed for failure as the decision not to file the Application in a Proceeding on 21 August 2023 was entirely correct.
In addition to that order, the present application again seeks a stay in relation to the appeals, the appointment of a legal guardian, leave under s 198G or s 471B of the Corporations Act, which are in identical terms to that application of 21 August 2023.
The Application in a Proceedings filed on 22 August 2023 is dismissed.
I certify that the preceding thirteen (13) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the ex tempore Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Aldridge. Associate:
Dated: 8 September 2023
SCHEDULE OF PARTIES
SYC 59 of 2010 Respondents
Fourth Respondent:
MR AB
0
1