Trendor & Trendor - [2025] FedCFamC1A 57

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1) APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Trendor & Trendor [2025] FedCFamC1A 57

Appeal from: Trendor & Trendor (No 2) [2024] FedCFamC1F 842

Appeal number(s): NAA 2 of 2025

File number(s): BRC 5389 of 2016

Judgment of: JARRETT J

Date of judgment:
7 April 2025

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – APPLICATION IN AN APPEAL – Provision of Transcript – Where the appellant seeks that the court provides the transcript – Whether transcript is necessary for appellant’s case – Application for the Court to provide transcript refused – Appellant relieved of obligation to provide the transcript – Application otherwise dismissed.

Legislation:
Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth)

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) r 13.22

Cases cited:
Marsters & Radcliffe [2023] FedCFamC1A 231

Pallin & Deave [2024] FedCFamC1A 155

Peake & Cousins (No. 2) [2019] FamCAFC 95

Sampson & Hartnett (2013) FLC 93-542; [2010] FamCAFC 220

Number of paragraphs: 31

Date of hearing: 4 April 2025

Place: Heard in Brisbane (by audio link), delivered in Adelaide

Counsel for the Appellant: Litigant in person

Counsel for the Respondent: Litigant in person

NAA 2 of 2025
BRC 5389 of 2016

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
DIVISION 1 APPELLATE JURISDICTION

BETWEEN:
MR TRENDOR

Appellant

AND:
MS TRENDOR

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JARRETT J

DATE OF ORDER:

7 APRIL 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Orders 4 and 5 made on 5 February 2025 are discharged.
2.Order 6 made on 5 February 2025 is discharged and the operation of r 13.22(2) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) is suspended, such that the appeal is not deemed abandoned and shall proceed to hearing without a transcript.
3.The Application in an Appeal filed by the appellant on 21 March 2025 is otherwise 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).
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) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
JARRETT J:

The appellant has appealed against final property adjustment orders made by a judge of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1) on 5 December 2024.
On 5 February 2025 the appellant was ordered to obtain an electronic transcript from the court’s authorised provider and file it on or…

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.

Continue reading Trendor & Trendor

Details

AGLC: Trendor & Trendor [2025] FedCFamC1A 57
Case: [2025] FedCFamC1A 57
Decision Date: 7 April 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Trendor & Trendor involved an application within an appeal process in the Family Law Division of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The appellant sought an order that the court provide a transcript of the proceedings for the appeal, arguing that it was necessary for the resolution of the appeal. The primary judge, who was hearing the application, considered the appellant's financial constraints and the nature of the grounds of appeal raised.

The court was required to determine whether it was necessary to order the provision of a transcript to assist in the resolution of the appeal. This involved assessing whether the appellant's claims of impecuniosity and the general nature of the complaints regarding the trial and judgment were sufficient to justify such an order. The court also needed to consider the principle that simply raising grounds of appeal that may depend on a transcript is not enough to demonstrate that an order for the court to meet the costs of the transcript is "demonstrably in the interests of justice."

The court found that the appellant had not established that exceptional circumstances warranted the court providing a transcript. The court noted that specific details of what is alleged to appear in the transcript are usually necessary to demonstrate the need for such an order. Given the appellant's financial situation, the court decided to relieve the appellant of the obligation to provide a transcript and suspended the operation of certain rules to prevent the appeal from being deemed abandoned. However, the court dismissed the application in its entirety, as the appellant's general complaints about the trial and judgment were insufficient to justify the provision of a transcript by the court.

The court's final orders discharged certain previous orders, suspended the operation of specific rules to allow the appeal to proceed, and dismissed the application in its entirety. The court's reasons for judgment noted that this copy may be subject to review for minor errors or to record variations to the order.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Orders 4 and 5 made on 5 February 2025 are discharged.

2. Order 6 made on 5 February 2025 is discharged and the operation of r 13.22(2) of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) is suspended, such that the appeal is not deemed abandoned and shall proceed to hearing without a transcript.

3. The Application in an Appeal filed by the appellant on 21 March 2025 is otherwise 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).

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

No other matters appear to be relevant to the issue at hand.Conclusions The appellant does not establish that this is a case where the court should exercise the discretion to order the provision of a transcript, or part of a transcript to assist the resolution of the appeal. No exceptional circumstances are made out. The observations of Riethmuller J in Pallin & Deave [2024] FedCFamC1A 155 at [22] are apposite:Simply raising grounds of appeal that may depend upon a transcript is not sufficient to demonstrate that an order for the court to meet the costs of the transcript is “demonstrably in the interests of justice”. Whilst there is no closed category of cases where orders may be made for the Court to provide a transcript for an appeal, it is usually necessary to provide specific details of what it is alleged will appear in the transcript (or in some cases that there is no relevant evidence in the transcript that would affect a ground that appears clearly on the terms of the judgment). The general nature of the complaints concerning the trial and the judgment of the primary judge made by the appellant in the context of the issues in this case are insufficient to demonstrate that it is in the interests of justice that the Court provide the transcript. Given the appellant’s claimed impecuniosity, which despite some reservations, I accept at face value, the appropriate course is to order that the provision of a transcript be dispensed with and the appellant be relieved of the deemed abandonment of his appeal. That will have a practical consequence for his appeal. He will necessarily be limited to arguments that do not rely upon references to the transcript. Neither party was represented before me on this application. Costs of this Application in an Appeal therefore, are not in issue. I make the orders set out at the commencement of these reasons.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Appeal from:	Trendor & Trendor (No 2) [2024] FedCFamC1F 842
Appeal number(s):	NAA 2 of 2025
File number(s):	BRC 5389 of 2016
Judgment of:	JARRETT J
Date of judgment:	7 April 2025
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – APPLICATION IN AN APPEAL – Provision of Transcript – Where the appellant seeks that the court provides the transcript – Whether transcript is necessary for appellant’s case – Application for the Court to provide transcript refused – Appellant relieved of obligation to provide the transcript – Application otherwise dismissed.
Legislation:	Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) r 13.22
Cases cited:	Marsters & Radcliffe [2023] FedCFamC1A 231 Pallin & Deave [2024] FedCFamC1A 155 Peake & Cousins (No. 2) [2019] FamCAFC 95 Sampson & Hartnett (2013) FLC 93-542; [2010] FamCAFC 220
Number of paragraphs:	31
Date of hearing:	4 April 2025
Place:	Heard in Brisbane (by audio link), delivered in Adelaide
Counsel for the Appellant:	Litigant in person
Counsel for the Respondent:	Litigant in person
NAA 2 of 2025 BRC 5389 of 2016
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA DIVISION 1 APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BETWEEN:	MR TRENDOR Appellant
AND:	MS TRENDOR Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	JARRETT J
DATE OF ORDER:	7 APRIL 2025