Taugher and Canes

[2014] FamCA 16

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

TAUGHER & CANES [2014] FamCA 16

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application – Dismissal – Where the applicant failed to appear.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Mr Taugher

RESPONDENT: Ms Canes

FILE NUMBER: BRC 6192 of 2011

DATE DELIVERED: 20 January 2014

PLACE DELIVERED: Brisbane

PLACE HEARD: Brisbane

JUDGMENT OF: Forrest J

HEARING DATE: 20 January 2014

REPRESENTATION

FOR THE APPLICANT: No Appearance

FOR THE RESPONDENT: No Appearance

Orders

1. The Application in a Case filed 28 March 2013 be dismissed.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Taugher & Canes has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT BRISBANE

FILE NUMBER: BRC 6192 of 2011

Mr Taugher

Applicant

And

Ms Canes

Respondent

EX TEMPORE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. I have before me an Application in a Case filed on 28 March 2013 in proceedings between the applicant, Mr Taugher, and the respondent, Ms Canes. 

2. Although the Application in a Case is reasonably difficult to interpret, a careful reading of it shows that it includes an application for urgent maintenance; it includes an application for return of some personal property; and further includes an application for a review of directions made by a Registrar of this Court on 5 March 2013. 

3. Those directions made by Registrar Stoneham on that day provided for the applicant in today’s proceedings, Mr Taugher, to file an Amended Initiating Application within twenty-one (21) days of that date in which he sets out any grounds relied upon by him pursuant to s 79A of the Family Law Act in respect of the setting aside or variation of final property orders that were made in this Court.  Although the Order says 3 September 2013, that is a typographical error and the date was in fact 3 September 2010 in proceedings BRF4097/2001.

4. On that particular day, final property division orders were made in property adjustment proceedings between the parties by former Justice Barry of this Court. It seems, although I have not been able to read all of the file, that Mr Taugher at some stage subsequent to receipt of those final orders decided to file an Initiating Application in which he somehow sought to set aside or vary those orders, but in which he did not properly particularise pursuant to s 79A the nature of the relief he was seeking and the basis upon which he was seeking that relief, hence Registrar Stoneham’s order of last year.

5. I also note that on 15 October 2013 Registrar Stoneham ordered, after having heard the applicant Mr Taugher appearing by telephone on his own behalf and there being no appearance by the respondent, that the matter be listed for hearing before a judge on today’s date for the review of the Registrar’s decision, with the applicant being given leave to appear at the hearing by telephone with a further notation providing for the applicant  to confirm to the Court in writing seven (7) days prior to the hearing of the telephone number upon which he could be contacted so that he could participate in the hearing. 

6. I have been informed by my staff that no such communication has been received or is noted on the file having been received from the applicant pursuant to that latter direction confirming what telephone number he could be contacted at.  Notwithstanding that, when the matter was called on this morning I had the Court Officer attempt to make contact by telephone with the applicant. She called a home landline telephone number which is the last recorded landline number in the court file at which the applicant could be contacted.  There was no answer.  She then asked me if she should call a mobile telephone number which is recorded in the file of being a mobile telephone number at which the applicant could be contacted to which I responded in the affirmative and she did.  Again, she was not able to get any answer or message bank at which a message could be left for the applicant.

7. Having made those unsuccessful attempts to contact the applicant to hear the application that he filed, I asked the Court Officer to call both the applicant and the respondent three times outside the Court. She did that and returned to the Court to inform me that there was no appearance by either party. 

8. In the circumstances I am left with no alternative but to dismiss the Application in a Case that was filed by the applicant in this matter on 28 March 2013 and I do so.

I certify that the preceding eight (8) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Forrest delivered on 20 January 2014.

Associate: 

Date:  20 January 2014