Sidorov and Sidorov (No. 2)

[2008] FamCA 1102

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SIDOROV & SIDOROV AND ANOR (NO. 2) [2008] FamCA 1102

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment Rectification and Deletion

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
Family Law Rules 2004

Bailey v Marinoff [1971] 125 CLR 529 at 539
Gikas v Papanayiotou (1977) 2 NSWLR 944 at 950-951
Raybos v Tectran (1987-88) 77 ALR 190
De L v Director General of the NSW Department of Community Services [No 2] (1997) 190 CLR 207
Storey & Keers Pty Ltd v Johnstone (1987) 9 NSWLR 446
Hatton v Harris [1892] AC 547 at 558

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Healy (2003) 52 ATR 330

APPLICANT: Mr Sidorov

RESPONDENT: Ms Sidorov

SECOND RESPONDENT: Mr Farrow

FILE NUMBER: SYC 3321 of 2007

DATE DELIVERED: 17 December 2008

PLACE DELIVERED: Sydney

PLACE HEARD: Sydney

JUDGMENT OF: O’Ryan J

HEARING DATE: 30 January, 15 April, 6 May, 2 June, 24 October, 11, 12 & 28 November, 4 & 16 December 2008

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Gruzman of Counsel

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: McBride Harle & Martin

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Macaulay, solicitor

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Pryor Tzannes & Wallis

COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT

CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Ms Christie of Counsel

SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT

CHILDREN’S LAWYER:

Legal Aid Commission of NSW

Orders

1. The judgement handed down on 16 December 2008 be rectified by the deletion of paragraph 216.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Sicorov & Sidorov and Anor is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY

FILE NUMBER: SYC 3321 of 2007

MR SIDOROV

Applicant

And

MS SIDOROV

Respondent

And

MR FARROW

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

INTRODUCTION

1. On 16 December 2008 I delivered a judgement and made final orders in property settlement, parenting and injunction proceedings.

2. The trial of the applications concluded on 4 December 2008 and I was concerned that judgement be delivered as soon as practicable as the proceedings had been before the Court since 2 May 2007. 

3. One of the orders I made in the parenting proceedings provided as follows:

   3.     During the school term in each fourteen day period the children, [M] and [K] live with the Husband in week one from 3:00 pm on Friday until 9:00 am on the following Monday or 9:00 am on the following Tuesday if the Monday is a public holiday and in week two from 3:00 pm on Wednesday until 3:00 pm on the following Friday.

4. However, in paragraph 216 of the judgment I said the following:

   216.I am of the opinion that the children should have the opportunity to spend more time with the Husband and in consequence also with their brother [L].  I propose to make an order that during the school term in each 14 day period in the first week the children live with the Husband from Wednesday after school until before school the following Friday morning, being for two nights, and in the second…