Stewart & Stewart

[2017] FamCAFC 67

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

STEWART & STEWART [2017] FamCAFC 67

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – CHILDREN – where the mother sought orders in respect of which school the children would attend – where the mother’s application was silent as to who would bear the financial responsibility for the costs associated with the children’s education –where the mother failed to demonstrate that the parents could afford the proposed school – where the parents had previously reached agreement as to the care arrangements for the children, including for equal shared parental responsibility – where the mother asserted the trial judge failed to follow the legislative pathway – where the mother contended that the trial judge misapprehended her case – where the mother asserted that trial judge failed to give adequate reasons – no error demonstrated – appeal dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – COSTS – where the father sought his costs of and incidental to the appeal – where the father is a solicitor – where by reason of the father being a solicitor his costs are capable of being quantified – costs awarded.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

Australian Coal & Shale Employees’ Federation v The Commonwealth (1953) 94 CLR 621
CDJ v VAJ (1998) 197 CLR 172
Coulter & Gerardine [2015] FamCA 287
Guss v Veenhuizen (No. 2) (1976) 136 CLR 47
House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499
Redmond & Redmond and Anor (Costs) [2014] FamCAFC 55
Simmons and Anor & Kingsley (2014) FLC 93-581

APPELLANT: Ms Stewart

RESPONDENT: Mr Stewart

FILE NUMBER: BRC 1248 of 2013

APPEAL NUMBER: NA 41 of 2016

DATE DELIVERED: 13 April 2017

PLACE DELIVERED: Brisbane

PLACE HEARD: Brisbane

JUDGMENT OF: Bryant CJ, Aldridge & Kent JJ

HEARING DATE: 8 March 2017

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Federal Circuit Court of Australia

LOWER COURT JUDGMENT DATE: 6 June 2016

LOWER COURT MNC: [2016] FCCA 1350

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT: Mr Drysdale

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPELLANT: North Law

THE RESPONDENT: In person

Orders

1. The application in an appeal filed by the appellant mother on 21 February 2017 is dismissed.

2. The appeal is dismissed.

3. The appellant mother pay the respondent father’s costs of and incidental to the appeal to be agreed, or failing agreement, to be assessed.

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 Stewart & Stewart 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).

THE FULL COURT OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT BRISBANE

Appeal Number: NA 41 of 2016
File Number: BRC 1248 of 2013

Ms Stewart

Appellant

And

Mr Stewart