Steele and Steele

[2011] FMCAfam 241

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

STEELE & STEELE [2011] FMCAfam 241

FAMILY LAW – Interim hearing – interpretation of superannuation order made in 2000 – whether relevant order capable of enforcement.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss.79, 79A, 106A.
Family Law Legislation Amendment (Superannuation) Act 2001 (Cth), s.5
Police Regulation (Superannuation) Act 1906 (NSW), s.5D

RBH & JIH [2005] FamCA 226
Yunghanns & Ors & Yunghanns & Ors [1999] FamCA 64; (1999) 24 Fam LR 400

Applicant: MS STEELE

Respondent: MR STEELE

File Number: SYC 5370 of 2010

Judgment of: Monahan FM

Hearing date: 10 February 2011

Date of Last Submission: 10 February 2011

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 1 March 2011

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Battley

Solicitors for the Applicant: Somerville Legal

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Kenny

Solicitors for the Respondent: Kim Monnox & Associates

ORDERS

THE COURT FINDS THAT:

1. Paragraph 21 of the Orders made by the Family Court of Australia on 17 August 2000 is not enforceable.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. All extant applications remain listed for mention on 4 March 2011 at 2:30pm but the interim hearing in relation to enforcement be vacated.

AND THE COURT NOTES THAT:

A.The Court encouraged the parties to have some meaningful discussions prior to the current interim hearing listing on 4 March 2011 at 2:30pm (“the interim hearing”).

B.The parties have liberty to approach Chambers in the event that they wish to vacate the interim hearing and seek a further listing after that date in light of the interim decision given by the Court today.

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

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYC 5370 of 2010

MS STEELE

Applicant

And

MR STEELE

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. In this matter, the Applicant, MS STEELE (“the wife”), and the Respondent, MR STEELE (“the husband”) are in dispute in respect of the following matters:

   ·the enforcement of property orders made in 2000;

   ·the setting aside of various child support agreements entered into by the parties during the period 2000 to 2005 (as sought by the husband); and

   ·adult child maintenance.

2. The matter initially came before this Court in a duty list on

   
   

   7 September 2010, and on that occasion the parties were ordered to attend a conciliation conference with a Registrar of this Court. Orders were also made by consent restraining the husband from commuting his interests with the Police Superannuation Scheme, and directing that he serve a copy of the Orders made upon the trustee of that scheme.

3. The matter came before Registrar McNamara on 15 November 2010 for a Conciliation Conference, but, unfortunately, the matter did not resolve. The matter returned before the Court for mention on 13 December 2010 and on that occasion the Court made orders for the filing of documents and otherwise set the matter down for an interim hearing on 10 February 2011 noting that:

   “The…