FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1) APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Vaughan [2025] FedCFamC1A 155
Appeal from: Vaughan & Vaughan (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC1F 455 Appeal number: NAA 369 of 2025 File number: ADC 5154 of 2022 Judgment of: SCHONELL J Date of judgment: 28 August 2025 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – Application in an Appeal – Leave to appeal – Harmful proceedings – Where the primary judge made interlocutory financial and parenting orders and restrained the applicant from instituting further proceedings against the respondent without leave – Where the applicant sought a grant of leave to appeal from the orders of the primary judge – Where all grounds of appeal are bereft of merit – Where the applicant has not established the proposed appeal is not vexatious – Application dismissed. Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 102Q, 102QAC, 102QAE, 102QAG, 102QAF
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) rr 3.11 and 8.01(1)
Cases cited: Ancer & Ancer [2024] FedCFamC1A 90
Bahonko v Sterjov (2008) 166 FCR 415; [2008] FCAFC 30
Concrete Pty Ltd v Parramatta Design & Developments Pty Ltd (2006) 229 CLR 577; [2006] HCA 55
Darley (No 4) [2023] FedCFamC1A 158
De Winter and De Winter (1979) FLC 90-605
DL v The Queen (2018) 266 CLR 1; [2018] HCA 26
Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337; [2000] HCA 63
Ebner & Pappas (2014) FLC 93-619; [2014] FamCAFC 229
Garside [2024] FedCFamC1A 250
House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40
Metwally v University of Wollongong (1985) 60 ALR 68; [1985] HCA 28
Nimesh Watapaldeniya v Transport Accident Commission [2022] VSCA 50
Oswald & Karrington (2016) FLC 93-726; [2016] FamCAFC 152
Randwick City Council v Fuller [1996] NSWCA 444
Re JJT; Ex parte Victoria Legal Aid (1998) 195 CLR 184; [1998] HCA 44
Number of paragraphs: 55 Date of hearing: 25 August 2025 Place: Determined in chambers The Applicant: No appearance required ORDERS
NAA 369 of 2025
ADC 5154 of 2022FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
DIVISION 1 APPELLATE JURISDICTIONBETWEEN: MR VAUGHAN
Applicant
ORDER MADE BY:
SCHONELL J
DATE OF ORDER:
28 AUGUST 2025
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The Application in an Appeal filed 8 August 2025 is 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…
Continue reading Vaughan
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Vaughan [2025] FedCFamC1A 155
- Case
- [2025] FedCFamC1A 155
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue was whether Mr Vaughan’s grounds for appeal were sufficiently meritorious to warrant leave to appeal. The court considered each ground meticulously, finding that Ground 39 was poorly articulated and thus dismissible as it did not identify any appealable error. Additionally, the court highlighted that it is not within its purview to ascertain errors, a responsibility that lies with the appellant. The court found that none of the grounds presented had reasonable prospects of success and were therefore likely to be vexatious.
The court concluded that the grounds outlined in Mr Vaughan’s Draft Notice of Appeal lacked merit and were likely vexatious. The appeal did not meet the threshold for leave as it failed to establish that it was not vexatious. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for leave to appeal. The court emphasized that the decision was based on the lack of merit and the potential vexatiousness of the proposed appeal.
The court ordered that the Application in an Appeal filed on 8 August 2025 be dismissed. This decision underscores the stringent criteria for granting leave to appeal, particularly in family law matters, where the court is cautious to prevent the proliferation of unmeritorious appeals.
Orders
Orders of the court
NAA 369 of 2025
ADC 5154 of 2022
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
DIVISION 1 APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BETWEEN:
MR VAUGHAN
Applicant
ORDER MADE BY:
SCHONELL J
DATE OF ORDER:
28 AUGUST 2025
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The Application in an Appeal filed 8 August 2025 is 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
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.