Vang & Chung (No 5) - [2024] FedCFamC1F 432

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Vang & Chung (No 5) [2024] FedCFamC1F 432

File number: SYC 1433 of 2020

Judgment of: HARPER J

Date of judgment: 18 June 2024

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application in a Proceeding – Where the Second Respondent seeks to be restrained from dealing with half of the sale proceeds from the sale of property – Where orders are made in accordance with the Application in a Proceeding – Where the wife seeks numerous additional orders in her Response – Where the wife is required to seek leave to file any interim applications – Where no leave is sought – Where the wife’s Response is dismissed.

Legislation: Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 (Cth) s 50

Cases cited:
Joubert & Verhoeven [2020] FamCA 53

Massalski v Riley (2022) 65 Fam LR 73; [2022] FedCFamC1F 36

Vang & Chung (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC1F 101

Division: Division 1 First Instance

Number of paragraphs: 13

Date of hearing: 18 June 2024

Place: Sydney

The Applicant: Litigant in person

Solicitor for the First Respondent: Ms Burreket of Broun Abrahams Burreket

Solicitor for the Second Respondent: Mr Zhu of Mangioni Biggs & Co
ORDERS

SYC 1433 of 2020

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)

BETWEEN:
MS VANG

Applicant

AND:
MR CHUNG

First Respondent

MR D

Second Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

HARPER J

DATE OF ORDER:

18 JUNE 2024

THE COURT NOTES THAT:
A.The sale of the property known as E Street, Suburb F NSW has completed and as a result, net proceeds of the sale of the property in the amount of $13,866,292.17 (“sale proceeds”) are held in the trust account of the solicitors for the Second Respondent.
B.By Order 2(e) of the orders made on 14 November 2023, no restrictions apply to 50% of the balance of the sale proceeds.
C.By Order 3 made on 14 November 2023, the orders made by the Court do not restrict the Second Respondent from dealing with the remaining 50% of the balance of the sale proceeds following 4.00 am on 22 January 2024.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The Second Respondent is not to further deal with 50% of the balance of the sale proceeds of the property, being the amount of $6,933,146.09 pending either of the determination of Appeal numbers NAA69/2024 and NAA70/2024; or 4.00 pm on 25 June 2024.
2.Leave for the wife to file and serve her response to the Application in a Proceeding is refused.
3.The Application in a Proceeding filed by the Second Respondent on 30 May 2024 is otherwise dismissed.

4.        Costs are reserved.
THE COURT ORDERS IN CHAMBERS THAT:
5.        The proceedings are listed in a callover at 10.00 am on 5 September 2024.
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…

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 Vang & Chung (No 5)

Details

AGLC: Vang & Chung (No 5) [2024] FedCFamC1F 432
Case: [2024] FedCFamC1F 432
Decision Date: 18 June 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia was an application in a proceeding concerning the sale proceeds of a property known as E Street, Suburb F NSW. Ms Vang, the applicant, sought to restrain the Second Respondent, Mr D, from dealing with half of the sale proceeds. The First Respondent, Mr Chung, is also involved in the matter. The court was tasked with deciding whether to impose restrictions on Mr D's ability to deal with his share of the sale proceeds and whether to grant the applicant leave to file a response to the application.

The court considered the existing orders that permitted Mr D to deal with his share of the sale proceeds following a specified date. The applicant sought to impose further restrictions on Mr D, arguing that these were necessary to protect her interests pending the outcome of an appeal. The court was required to determine whether the applicant's application was meritorious and whether she should be granted leave to file a response. The court found that the applicant's response was not filed within the required timeframe and therefore dismissed it. The court also found that the applicant's application did not meet the threshold for leave to be granted.

The court dismissed the application and noted that the sale proceeds were held in a trust account. The court ordered that Mr D was not to deal with his share of the sale proceeds pending the determination of the appeal or a specified date. The court also noted that the proceedings were listed for a callover on a future date. The court reserved costs and noted that its reasons for judgment were subject to review and possible variation. The court's orders were made in accordance with the relevant family law rules and legislation, which prohibit the publication of identifying information about parties and witnesses in family law proceedings.

Orders

Orders of the court

SYC 1433 of 2020

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)

BETWEEN:

MS VANG

Applicant

AND:

MR CHUNG

First Respondent

MR D

Second Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

HARPER J

DATE OF ORDER:

18 JUNE 2024

THE COURT NOTES THAT:

A. The sale of the property known as E Street, Suburb F NSW has completed and as a result, net proceeds of the sale of the property in the amount of $13,866,292.17 (“sale proceeds”) are held in the trust account of the solicitors for the Second Respondent.

B. By Order 2(e) of the orders made on 14 November 2023, no restrictions apply to 50% of the balance of the sale proceeds.

C. By Order 3 made on 14 November 2023, the orders made by the Court do not restrict the Second Respondent from dealing with the remaining 50% of the balance of the sale proceeds following 4.00 am on 22 January 2024.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The Second Respondent is not to further deal with 50% of the balance of the sale proceeds of the property, being the amount of $6,933,146.09 pending either of the determination of Appeal numbers NAA69/2024 and NAA70/2024; or 4.00 pm on 25 June 2024.

2. Leave for the wife to file and serve her response to the Application in a Proceeding is refused.

3. The Application in a Proceeding filed by the Second Respondent on 30 May 2024 is otherwise dismissed.

4. Costs are reserved.

THE COURT ORDERS IN CHAMBERS THAT:

5. The proceedings are listed in a callover at 10.00 am on 5 September 2024.

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:	SYC 1433 of 2020
Judgment of:	HARPER J
Date of judgment:	18 June 2024
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application in a Proceeding – Where the Second Respondent seeks to be restrained from dealing with half of the sale proceeds from the sale of property – Where orders are made in accordance with the Application in a Proceeding – Where the wife seeks numerous additional orders in her Response – Where the wife is required to seek leave to file any interim applications – Where no leave is sought – Where the wife’s Response is dismissed.
Legislation:	Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 (Cth) s 50
Cases cited:	Joubert & Verhoeven [2020] FamCA 53 Massalski v Riley (2022) 65 Fam LR 73; [2022] FedCFamC1F 36 Vang & Chung (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC1F 101
Division:	Division 1 First Instance
Number of paragraphs:	13
Date of hearing:	18 June 2024
Place:	Sydney
The Applicant:	Litigant in person
Solicitor for the First Respondent:	Ms Burreket of Broun Abrahams Burreket
Solicitor for the Second Respondent:	Mr Zhu of Mangioni Biggs & Co

SYC 1433 of 2020
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN:	MS VANG Applicant
AND:	MR CHUNG First Respondent MR D Second Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	HARPER J
DATE OF ORDER:	18 JUNE 2024