SCVG and KLD (No. 3)

[2018] FamCA 392

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SCVG & KLD (NO. 3) [2018] FamCA 392

FAMILY LAW – ORDERS – Stay of orders pending the resolution of an application to set aside a judgment on the grounds of fraud – Stay of orders pending the resolution of an application to set aside a judgment on the grounds of a party being absent during the proceedings.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
Family Law Rules 2004 r 17.02

McCann v Parsons (1954) 93 CLR 418
SCVG & KLD [2018] FamCA 27

APPLICANT: Mr SCVG

RESPONDENT: Ms KLD

FILE NUMBER: SYC 4380 of 2008

DATE DELIVERED: 31 May 2018

PLACE DELIVERED: Canberra

PLACE HEARD: Canberra

JUDGMENT OF: Gill J

HEARING DATE: 21 May 2018

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Self-representing

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr A Stenhouse

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Macphillamy Lawyers

Orders

1. The two applications in a case filed by the Applicant on 9 May 2018 seeking that the Orders of Gill J of 14 September 2107 and of Cronin J of 20 August 2015 be stayed are dismissed.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym SCVG & KLD (No. 3) has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT CANBERRA

FILE NUMBER: SYC 4380 of 2008

Mr SCVG

Applicant

And

Ms KLD

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. By two applications in a case filed 9 May 2018 Mr SCVG seeks stays of orders made in relation to costs awarded by Justice Cronin on 20 August 2015 and by myself on 14 September 2017. 

2. These applications for stays are in the context of Mr SCVG’s applications to:

   1.Set aside, pursuant to r 17.02 of the Family Law Rules 2004, the costs order made by Justice Cronin on the basis that was procured by fraud; and

   2.Set aside, pursuant to r 17.02, the Orders made by me on the basis that they were made in the absence of Mr SCVG.

3. The procedural history includes an attempt to file an application in a case by Mr SCVG, which was refused, which sought the relief regarding the Justice Cronin Orders.  Judgment was given on 22 January 2018 resulting in the application being taken as filed on 24 January 2018.  At issue in those proceedings was the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain such applications.  I identified then that there is a jurisdiction within the Court at first instance to deal with such matters.[1]

   [1]SCVG & KLD [2018] FamCA 27.

4. The matter was then adjourned for hearing on 15 February…