Skinner & Alfonso-Skinner

Case [2010] FamCA 329


FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SKINNER & ALFONSO-SKINNER [2010] FamCA 329
FAMILY LAW – JURISDICTION – ANTI-SUIT INJUNCTION – Proceedings commenced by wife in Spain for divorce and ancillary relief – Proceedings commenced by husband in Australia for divorce, financial orders and limited parenting orders – Husband sought an anti-suit injunction preventing the wife continuing proceedings in Spain – Wife and children live, and continue to remain, in Spain – Bulk of the parties’ property is in Australia – Consideration of jurisdiction of foreign court and international comity – Where the court can determine the current proceedings before it without impinging on the foreign court – Consideration of bifurcation of the proceedings in light of Henry v Henry and Voth v Manildra Flour Mills Pty Ltd
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 75(2), 79
Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)

Bank of Tokyo Limited v Karoon [1987] AC 45
CSR Limited v Cigna Insurance Australia Ltd (1997) 189 CLR 345
Dobson and Van Londen (2005) FLC 93-225
EJK and TSL (2006) FLC 93-287
Gilmore v Gilmore (1993) FLC 92-353
Henry v Henry (1996) 185 CLR 571
Hilton v Guyot (1895) 159 US 113
Kemeny& Kemeny (1998) FLC 92-806
Société Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v Lee Kui Jack [1987]  AC 871

Voth v Manildra Flour Mills Pty Ltd (1990) 171 CLR 538

Nygh P. E. Conflict of Laws in Australia (7th ed, 2002)

APPLICANT: Mr Skinner
RESPONDENT: Ms Alfonso-Skinner
FILE NUMBER: SYC 5175 of 2009
DATE DELIVERED: 28 April 2010
PLACE DELIVERED: Lismore
PLACE HEARD: Sydney
JUDGMENT OF: Murphy J
HEARING DATE: 9 December 2009; 19 April, 2010

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Grieve QC
SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Watson & Watson Solicitors
COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Beaumont
SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Barkus Doolan Kelly

Orders

  1. THAT the application by the husband for the Orders sought in paragraphs 1 to 6 inclusive of the Initiating Application filed on 28 August 2009 be permanently stayed.

  2. THAT the Application for Divorce filed by the husband in the Federal Magistrates Court on 28 August 2009 be permanently stayed.

  3. THAT the application by the husband for the Order sought in paragraph 10 of the Initiating Application filed on 28 August 2009 be dismissed.

  4. THAT the Application in a Case filed by the husband on 23 October 2009 be dismissed.

  5. THAT the application by the husband for financial orders sought in paragraphs 7 to 9 inclusive and paragraph 11 of the Initiating Application filed on 28 August 2009 and the application by the wife for financial orders sought in paragraphs 2 to 5 inclusive of the Response to Initiating Application filed on 10 October 2009 be adjourned to a Registrar of this court sitting at Sydney at a time and on a date to be fixed for the making of further directions.

  6. THAT each of the husband and wife shall file and serve upon the other not less than 14 days prior to the date for directions appointed in accordance with the previous paragraph of these…

Continue reading Skinner & Alfonso-Skinner

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Skinner & Alfonso-Skinner [2010] FamCA 329
Case
[2010] FamCA 329
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of *Skinner & Alfonso-Skinner* involved an application by the husband for various orders, including an application for divorce and financial orders, which the wife sought to have stayed or dismissed. The matter came before Murphy J.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the husband's application for divorce and his applications for financial orders should be permanently stayed, and whether other applications made by the husband should be dismissed. The court was also required to consider the wife's applications for financial orders and make directions for the future conduct of the proceedings.

Murphy J ordered that the husband's application for divorce and his applications for financial orders be permanently stayed. The court also dismissed the husband's other applications. The applications for financial orders made by both the husband and the wife were adjourned to a Registrar for further directions, with both parties required to file and serve minutes of directions sought. The court also made orders regarding the making of written submissions on costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

THAT the application by the husband for the Orders sought in paragraphs 1 to 6 inclusive of the Initiating Application filed on 28 August 2009 be permanently stayed.

2.

THAT the Application for Divorce filed by the husband in the Federal Magistrates Court on 28 August 2009 be permanently stayed.

3.

THAT the application by the husband for the Order sought in paragraph 10 of the Initiating Application filed on 28 August 2009 be dismissed.

4.

THAT the Application in a Case filed by the husband on 23 October 2009 be dismissed.

5.

THAT the application by the husband for financial orders sought in paragraphs 7 to 9 inclusive and paragraph 11 of the Initiating Application filed on 28 August 2009 and the application by the wife for financial orders sought in paragraphs 2 to 5 inclusive of the Response to Initiating Application filed on 10 October 2009 be adjourned to a Registrar of this court sitting at Sydney at a time and on a date to be fixed for the making of further directions.

6.

THAT each of the husband and wife shall file and serve upon the other not less than 14 days prior to the date for directions appointed in accordance with the previous paragraph of these Orders, a minute of the directions sought to be made for the further progress of the applications for financial orders.

7.

THAT any submissions in support of the orders for costs contemplated by paragraphs 13 and 5 of, respectively, the husband’s said Initiating Application and Application in a Case and paragraphs 6 and 8 of, respectively, the wife’s said Response to Initiating Application and her Response to an Application in a Case filed 4 December 2009 be:

(a) Made in writing; and

(b) Forwarded via e-mail to the Associate to Justice Murphy, and sent contemporaneously to the solicitors for the other party, within 21 days of the date of these Orders.

8.

In the event that neither party forwards submissions in respect of costs in accordance with the previous paragraph of these Orders, each party shall bear their own costs of and incidental to these proceedings.

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.