Walford and Dore

[2009] FamCA 450

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WALFORD & DORE [2009] FamCA 450

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Registrar – Review of decision – whether correspondence between party and the Court, and between the Court and one party, should be made available to the other party – HELD – Correspondence between one party and the Court, and the Court and one party, should generally be copied and provided to the other party

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Mr Walford

RESPONDENT: Ms Dore

FILE NUMBER: CAF 1094 of 1995

DATE DELIVERED: 15 May 2009

PLACE DELIVERED: Canberra

PLACE HEARD: Canberra

JUDGMENT OF: Faulks DCJ

HEARING DATE: 15 May 2009

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: In person

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: No appearance

Orders

1. The father has leave to commence proceedings before me by application in a case rather than the appropriate form. 

2. The applicant, the father, may inspect correspondence on the court file between the mother and court personnel.

3. I note that copies of such correspondence have been made available to the father.

4. The matter is removed from the pending cases inventory.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT CANBERRA

FILE NUMBER: CAF 1094 of 1995

MR WALFORD

Applicant

And

MS DORE

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The proceedings before the Court this day were filed by the father in an application in a case on 5 May 2009 seeking, in effect, a review of the Registrar's decision in this matter prohibiting him from inspecting correspondence on the court file between the respondent (to the proceedings that have now been concluded) and court personnel. 

2. Leaving aside for a moment whether the Registrar's decision was appropriate or not, a review of a Registrar's decision is a hearing de novo.  In considering the matter, it is clear to me that in the ordinary course of events the correspondence on a court file between one litigant and the court ought to be available to the other litigant and should, in fact, in the ordinary course of events be copied to the other litigant.  There is no basis upon which either party to proceedings can communicate with the Court, even the court staff, without that being made available as a matter of course to the other party. 

3. In these circumstances, although I do not accept that the reasons given by the father necessarily constitute any basis for his inspection of the file, it seems to me his request is appropriate and reasonable in itself and accordingly I propose to make an order in those terms. 

4. I note in this matter that in anticipation of that determination I have requested the court staff to go through the court file and to extract from it all correspondence passing between the mother and the Court or the Court and the mother and copies have now been made available to the father.

I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Deputy Chief Justice Faulks.  

Associate:

Date:  26 May 2009