Victor and Duncan and Anor (No.2)

Link copied
Case Copied 8 min read

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTOR & DUNCAN & ANOR (No.2) [2015] FCCA 2112
Catchwords:
CHILD SUPPORT – Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Social Services and Child Support Division) – appeal from a decision of the AAT in a child support first review – where Notice of Appeal filed – where Appellant seeks a stay of orders until Appeal finalised – principles relating to stay considered.

Legislation:

Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth), s.98H

Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth), s.103M

Cases cited:
Aldridge & Keaton (Stay Appeal) [2009] FamCAFC 106
Victor & Duncan & Anor (SSAT Appeal) [2015] FCCA 1073
Applicant: MR VICTOR
First Respondent: MS DUNCAN
Second Respondent: CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR
File Number: SYC 2044 of 2013
Judgment of: Judge Scarlett
Hearing date: 14 July 2015
Date of Last Submission: 14 July 2015
Delivered at: Sydney
Delivered on: 22 July 2015

REPRESENTATION

Applicant: In person
First Respondent: No appearance
Solicitor for the Second Respondent: Mr Dennis
Solicitors for the Second Respondent: Sparke Helmore Lawyers

ORDERS

  1. Order (2) made on 30 April 2015 is stayed pending determination of the Appeal filed by the Applicant on 28 May 2015.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Victor & Duncan & Anor is approved pursuant to s.110X(4)(h) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYC 2044 of 2013

MR VICTOR

Applicant

And

MS DUNCAN

First Respondent

CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR
Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. This is an application for a stay of an order made by this Court on 30 April 2015 in respect of an appeal by the Appellant against a decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal.  In his Application in a Case filed on 28 May 2015 supported by an affidavit, the Appellant seeks that the orders made on 30 April 2015 are stayed until the appeal of the Full Court of the Family Court is determined.

  2. The circumstances are that on 30 April 2015, this Court made the following orders:

    (1)    The amended notice of appeal filed on 29 October 2013 is dismissed.

    (2)    The decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal made on 7 March 2013 and posted on 20 March 2013 is affirmed.

    (3)    Written submissions in support of any application for costs and the affidavit setting out the way in which the costs sought are quantified are to be filed and served within 28 days from the date of these orders.

    (4)    Any written submissions in opposition to any application for costs are to be filed and served within a further period of 14 days.

  3. Those were the orders, and since then the First and Second Respondents have each filed submission on the question of costs.

  4. The Appellant has indeed lodged an Appeal against the decision of the Court.  He has set out some 10 grounds of appeal, which I shall quote in full:

    (1)  That his Honour erred in failing to consider all relevant matters.

    (2)  That his Honour’s…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Victor and Duncan and Anor (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
[2015] FCCA 2112
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Victor and Duncan and Anor (No.2)*, the applicant, Victor, sought a stay of an order made by Judge Scarlett on 30 April 2015, pending the determination of an appeal filed by the applicant on 28 May 2015. The precise nature of the dispute leading to the original order is not detailed in the provided text.

The central legal issue before the court was whether to grant a stay of the existing order. This required the court to consider the applicant's prospects of success on appeal and whether the balance of convenience favoured granting the stay.

The court reasoned that a stay should be granted pending the determination of the appeal. This decision indicates the court was satisfied that the applicant had demonstrated sufficient grounds to warrant suspending the operation of the order made by Judge Scarlett until the appeal could be heard and decided.

Consequently, the court ordered that Order (2) made on 30 April 2015 be stayed pending the determination of the Appeal filed by the Applicant on 28 May 2015.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

Order (2) made on 30 April 2015 is stayed pending determination of the Appeal filed by the Applicant on 28 May 2015.

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.