Sirola and Sirola and Ors (No 2)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SIROLA & SIROLA AND ORS (NO. 2) [2018] FamCA 1132

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for appointment of case guardian – Property proceedings – Where the interveners and the wife seek the appointment of a case guardian for the husband – Court finds that the husband has mental health concerns which mean he is not capable of adequately conducting or giving adequate instructions for the conduct of the case – Orders made for the appointment of a case guardian.

Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) rr. 6.08, 6.09

R v Sirola [2018] NSWSC 1893

APPLICANT: Ms Sirola

RESPONDENT: Mr Sirola

INTERVENOR: Ms T Sirola and Mr U Sirola

FILE NUMBER: SYC 5380 of 2014

DATE DELIVERED: 13 December 2018

PLACE DELIVERED: Sydney

PLACE HEARD: Sydney

JUDGMENT OF: McClelland J

HEARING DATE: 13 December 2018

REPRESENTATION

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Harris Freidman Lawyers

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Family Law Practice Australia Pty Ltd

SOLICITOR FOR THE INTERVENOR: Prime Lawyers

Orders

1. Mr D be appointed as Case Guardian of the First Respondent, pursuant to rule 6.09 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

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 Sirola & Sirola and Ors (No 2) 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 SYDNEY

FILE NUMBER: SYC 5380 of 2014

Ms Sirola

Applicant

And

Mr Sirola

Respondent

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT

1. This matter concerns an application to appoint a case guardian to act on behalf of the Respondent husband, Mr Sirola, (“the husband”) in the property proceedings between the parties. 

2. The parenting proceedings between the parties were finalised on 16 December 2016, and at the conclusion of those parenting proceedings, the property proceedings were adjourned to permit the intervention of certain parties, including Ms T Sirola and Mr U Sirola (“the interveners”), who remain parties to the proceedings today. 

3. The background and history of this matter are set out in earlier judgments of the Court.  The application for the appointment of a case guardian is made in circumstances where the husband is incarcerated and facing serious criminal charges and where his mental health has been brought into question in those proceedings.

4. The solicitor for the interveners, Mr JJ, has helpfully provided an Outline of Argument document (“Exhibit “A”) and has referred me to evidence upon which he relies, which is not challenged in these proceedings.  That evidence includes the following:

   a)Affidavit of Mr JJ filed on 19 October 2016;

   b)Affidavit of Mr JJ filed on 10 December 2018;