VALIYAV & STEINER

[2015] FCCA 1816

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VALIYAV & STEINER [2015] FCCA 1816

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Parenting – future care arrangements – compliance with court orders – failure to file material in the proceedings – proceedings dealt with on a final undefended basis.

Legislation: 

Family Law Act 1975, ss.4, 4AB, 60B, 60CA, 60CC, 60I, 61C, 61DA, 65DAA(5), 67ZBB, 69ZK
Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001, r.4.03
Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999, ss.3, 14, 42, 51, 55, 57

Jones & Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298
Allesch v Maunz [2000] HCA 40
Tate & Tate [2000] FamCA 1040

Applicant: MS VALIYAV

First Respondent: MR STEINER

File Number: AYC 75 of 2013

Judgment of: Judge Harman

Hearing date: 20 April 2015

Date of Last Submission: 20 April 2015

Delivered at: Albury

Delivered on: 20 April 2015

REPRESENTATION

Solicitors for the Applicant: Mr Sloan of James G Sloan

Solicitors for the Respondent: Ms Thomas on a duty basis

ORDERS

1. The children [W] born [omitted] 2000, [X] born [omitted] 2006, [Y] born [omitted] 2007 and [Z] born [omitted] 2007 shall live with their mother Ms Valiyav.

2. Pursuant to S.65DA(2) and S.62B, the particulars of the obligations these orders create and the particulars of the consequences that may follow if a person contravenes these orders and details of who can assist parties adjust to and comply with an order are set out in the Fact Sheet attached hereto and these particulars are included in these orders.

3. All outstanding Applications and Responses are withdrawn and dismissed and all issues are removed from the list of matters awaiting hearing.

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA

AT ALBURY

AYC 75 of 2013

MS VALIYAV

Applicant

And

MR STEINER

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. These are proceedings relating to parenting arrangements for four children [W], [X], [Y] and [Z], born respectively [omitted] 2000, [omitted] 2006, [omitted] 2007 and [omitted] 2007.

2. The parties to the proceedings are the children’s parents being their mother, Ms Valiyav, who is the Applicant, and Mr Steiner, their father, who is the Respondent.

History of proceedings

1. These proceedings have a lengthy and significant history before the Court. Notwithstanding that history there would appear to be no judicial controversy before the Court and there has never been one in that the Respondent has failed, steadfastly, to file any material not even a Notice of Address for Service.

2. The proceedings were commenced by an Application Initiating Proceedings filed on 2 December 2013. The Application appeared to have been served relatively promptly thereafter, an Acknowledgement of Service suggesting that service was personally affected on 24 January 2014, some four weeks prior to the first return date of the proceedings before the Court, namely 24 February 2014.

3. The Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001[1], provide that a Respondent must, within a period of 14 days from the date of service, file a…