Stahl & Acker (No 2)

[2023] FedCFamC2F 1115

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

(DIVISION 2)

Stahl & Acker (No 2) [2023] FedCFamC2F 1115

File number(s):

ADC 5736 of 2021

Judgment of:

JUDGE MCGINN

Date of judgment:

25 August 2023

Catchwords:

FAMILY LAW – Application for costs – application following determination of preliminary issues as to length of de facto relationship and whether leave should be granted pursuant to s 44 – s 117(2A) (a), (c), (e), (f) – application refused – each party to bear their own costs

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 (Cth)

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Division 2 (Family Law) Rules 2021

Cases cited:

Anison & Anison [2019] FamCAFC 108; (2019) FLC 93 – 908

Division:

Division 2 Family Law

Number of paragraphs:

31

Date of last submission/s:

22 August 2023

Date of hearing:

On the papers (considered in Chambers)

Place:

Adelaide

Counsel for the Applicant:

Ms Lewis

Solicitor for the Applicant:

Resolve Divorce Lawyers

Counsel for the Respondent:

Mr Roberts

Solicitor for the Respondent:

Lumond Lawyers (previously Thomson and Associates)

ORDERS

ADC 5736 of 2021

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MS STAHL

Applicant

AND:

MR ACKER

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	JUDGE MCGINN
DATE OF ORDER:	25 AUGUST 2023

IT IS ORDERED:

1.That the applicant de facto wife’s application for costs in respect of the applications determined by orders of 4 July 2023 do stand 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).

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

JUDGE McGINN:

1. Judgment was delivered on 4 July 2023 after a trial hearing in relation to the questions of the length of the de facto relationship, whether leave should be granted pursuant to section 44(6) of the Family Law Act 1975 (‘the Act’) to allow the applicant de facto wife to issue proceedings with respect to the question of property settlement arising out of the parties’ de facto relationship and in relation to the question of costs of a mediation.

2. The respondent de facto husband sought dismissal of those applications.

3. As a result of the judgment of this Court it was declared that the de facto relationship concluded on 20 August 2017, that leave be granted pursuant to section 44 for…