Teng & Cho (No 2) - [2025] FedCFamC2F 1022

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Teng & Cho (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC2F 1022

File number(s): SYC 3205 of 2022

Judgment of: JUDGE STREET

Date of judgment: 24 July 2025

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – s 102NA – broad construction.

Legislation:
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Cross-examination) Bill 2008

Cases cited: Naisby & Naisby (No 2) [2024] FedCFamC1F 699

Division: Division 2 Family Law

Number of paragraphs: 18

Date of hearing: 24 July 2025

Place: Sydney

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr S Schonell

Solicitor for the Applicant: Monardo Legal

Counsel for the Respondent: The Respondent appeared via visual/audio link

ORDERS

SYC 3205 of 2022

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:
MR TENG

Applicant

AND:
MS CHO

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE STREET

DATE OF ORDER:

24 JULY 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Pursuant to s 102NA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), neither party is to be permitted to cross examine the other party.
2.The Court adjourns the property proceedings part heard to 23 - 24 October 2025 commencing at 10:00 am by video and/or audio-link pursuant to Part 6 Division 6 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court Australia Act 2021 (Cth).
3.The Court grants leave to the applicant to obtain an updated valuation from H Company, in respect of the Suburb C property, to be filed and served at least seven (7) days prior to the adjourned hearing date.
4. The applicant provide to the respondent or the respondent’s representative, at the time of service of the report, a copy of all communications sent to H Company in relation to obtaining the further report.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
A. By reason of the order made under s 102NA, the parties are entitled to Legal Aid through commonwealth funding in the further conduct of these proceedings being final property proceedings in which there is an allegation of family violence.

B. The Court expects the respondent mother consistent with what the Court was informed, to forthwith takes steps with the benefit of this order to attend upon Legal Aid urgently, to obtain legal aid representation noting that these are proceeding that have already occupied four days.

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).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of 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 subsection 114Q(2)…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Teng & Cho (No 2) and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2025] FedCFamC2F 1022
Decision Date: 24 July 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Mr Teng applied to the Federal Circuit and Family Court seeking orders under s 102NA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) to prohibit the parties from cross-examining each other in property proceedings. Ms Cho opposed the application. The court was required to determine whether the application was appropriate under the provisions of s 102NA of the Act, and whether it was in the best interests of any relevant child of the family for such an order to be made. The court considered the nature of the allegations, the history of the proceedings, and the interests of any relevant child. The court found that it was appropriate to make the order sought by Mr Teng and that it was in the best interests of any relevant child for such an order to be made. The court made the order sought by Mr Teng, prohibiting the parties from cross-examining each other. The court adjourned the proceedings and granted leave to the applicant to obtain an updated valuation of a property. The court also noted that the parties were entitled to Legal Aid through commonwealth funding in the further conduct of these proceedings.

Orders

Orders of the court

SYC 3205 of 2022

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:

MR TENG

Applicant

AND:

MS CHO

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE STREET

DATE OF ORDER:

24 JULY 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. Pursuant to s 102NA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), neither party is to be permitted to cross examine the other party.

2. The Court adjourns the property proceedings part heard to 23 - 24 October 2025 commencing at 10:00 am by video and/or audio-link pursuant to Part 6 Division 6 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court Australia Act 2021 (Cth).

3. The Court grants leave to the applicant to obtain an updated valuation from H Company, in respect of the Suburb C property, to be filed and served at least seven (7) days prior to the adjourned hearing date.

4. The applicant provide to the respondent or the respondent’s representative, at the time of service of the report, a copy of all communications sent to H Company in relation to obtaining the further report.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

A. By reason of the order made under s 102NA, the parties are entitled to Legal Aid through commonwealth funding in the further conduct of these proceedings being final property proceedings in which there is an allegation of family violence.

B. The Court expects the respondent mother consistent with what the Court was informed, to forthwith takes steps with the benefit of this order to attend upon Legal Aid urgently, to obtain legal aid representation noting that these are proceeding that have already occupied four days.

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).

Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law 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.

File number(s):		SYC 3205 of 2022
Judgment of:		JUDGE STREET
Date of judgment:		24 July 2025
Catchwords:		FAMILY LAW – s 102NA – broad construction.
Legislation:		Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Cross-examination) Bill 2008
Cases cited:	Naisby & Naisby (No 2) [2024] FedCFamC1F 699
Division:		Division 2 Family Law
Number of paragraphs:		18
Date of hearing:		24 July 2025
Place:		Sydney
Counsel for the Applicant:		Mr S Schonell
Solicitor for the Applicant:		Monardo Legal
Counsel for the Respondent:		The Respondent appeared via visual/audio link

SYC 3205 of 2022
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:	MR TENG Applicant
AND:	MS CHO Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	JUDGE STREET
DATE OF ORDER:	24 JULY 2025