Webster & Glover (No. 2)

[2021] FamCA 127

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Webster & Glover (No. 2) [2021] FamCA 127

File number(s):

BRC 11228 of 2016

Judgment of:

BAUMANN J

Date of judgment:

16 March 2021

Catchwords:

FAMILY LAW – Where there is a preliminary question as to whether there is property not covered by the terms of the binding financial agreement – Where the Court finds that the binding financial agreement covers all interests

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 90KA, 90SA

Cases cited:

Frederick & Frederick (2019) FLC 93-900

Jones & Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298

Number of paragraphs:

36

Date of hearing:

22 September 2020

Place:

Brisbane

Counsel for the Applicants:

Mr J Bunning

Solicitor for the Applicants:

Damien Greer Lawyers

Counsel for the Respondents:

Mr J Cahill

Solicitor for the Respondents:

Saunders & Co Solicitors

ORDERS

BRC 11228 of 2016

BETWEEN:

MR WEBSTER

First Applicant

S PTY LTD

Second Applicant

AND:

MS GLOVER

First Respondent

R PTY LTD

Second Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	BAUMANN J
DATE OF ORDER:	16 MARCH 2021

THE COURT ORDERS:

1.That these proceedings be adjourned for Case Management Hearing for pronouncement of orders at 9.30am on 8 April 2021 in the Family Court of Australia at Brisbane.

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 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Webster & Glover has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

BAUMANN J:

INTRODUCTION

1. By Orders made 17 December 2018, for Reasons published on 16 November 2018 by Judge Jarrett, a de facto financial agreement dated by the parties on 1 July 2010 (hereafter called the “BFA”) was found to be binding upon the parties and the Application by Ms Glover  to set aside the agreement on a number of grounds, was dismissed.  Subsequently the proceedings were transferred to the Family Court of Australia.

2. However, that determination did not bring these proceedings in this Court to an end.

3. The Applicant Mr Webster had initially commenced proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia in November 2016 seeking inter alia, that the financial agreement was binding, however since that date numerous applications have been filed and determined both in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia and now the Family Court of Australia.

4. Simply expressed, the hearing before me on 22 September 2020, when Mr Bunning of Counsel appeared for Mr Webster and Mr Cahill of Counsel appeared for Ms Glover was a discrete hearing listed by Order made 9 July 2020, identified by the Order made on that day in these terms: “That the preliminary question as to whether there is property not covered…