Y and Y

Case [2001] FMCAfam 258


FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Y & Y [2001] FMCAfam 258
CHILD SUPPORT – Administrative assessment – liable parent – recovery of monies – DNA testing.
Applicant: G W Y
First Respondent: M Y
Second Respondent CHILD SUPPORT AGENCY
File Number: ZN 2861 of 2001
Judgment of: Donald FM
Hearing date: 26 October 2001
Delivered at: Newcastle
Delivered on: 22 November 2001

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Robert Peattie & Associates
Solicitors for the First Applicant: Farrell Lusher Solicitors
Counsel for the First Respondent: Ian Duane
Solicitors for the Child Support Registrar: James McCulloch, Australian Government Solicitors

ORDERS

  1. That, on or before the date on which she receives payment pursuant to Order 2 of the Orders made in the Family Court of Australia on


    9 August 1999, the First Respondent pay to the Applicant the sum of $21,953.80 less any amount recovered by the Applicant from the Second Respondent as referred to herein.

  2. That within 28 days of the date of these orders, the First Respondent pay to the Applicant the sum of $742.50 being the cost of DNA testing carried out by Silbase Scientific Services.

  3. That the Second Respondent pay to the Applicant the sum of $750.32.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
NEWCASTLE

ZN 2861 of 2001

G W Y

Applicant

And

M Y

First Respondent

And

CHILD SUPPORT AGENCY

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. This is a matter in which the Applicant has sought orders against the Respondent in the following terms:

    (a)That the Child Support Agency be joined to the proceedings.

    (b)

    That pursuant to Section 107 of the Child Support (Assessment) Act, the Respondent, M Y, be declared never to have been entitled to an administrative assessment of child support for the child,


    B A Y.

    (c)That M Y pay to G W Y within twenty-eight (28) days of the making of these Orders or at such other times as may be determined by the Court the following sums:

    (i)The cost of DNA testing carried out by Silbase Scientific Services in the sum of $742.50;

    (ii)Child support paid to M Y direct by G W Y from 19 February 1998 to 15 February 2001 in the sum of $21,953.80;

    (iii)Child support paid to the Child Support Agency for payment out to M Y in the sum of $1,701.13.

    (iv)The Applicant’s legal costs as agreed between the parties but failing agreement as assessed by the Court.

    (d)That in the alternative to Order C, the Child Support Agency repay to the Applicant the sums referred to in Order C(ii), (iii) and (iv) of this application.

  2. The Orders sought as A and B, above, have been made by consent.  The Child Support Agency has been joined to these proceedings and was represented as was the Applicant and the First Respondent.

  3. I note that the Child Support Agency, the Second Respondent, has now paid to the Applicant the sum of $950, being part of the sum sought by the Applicant in C(iii), above.

  4. It is the submission of…

Continue reading Y and Y

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Y and Y [2001] FMCAfam 258
Case
[2001] FMCAfam 258
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Family Court of Australia involved a dispute between parties identified as Y and Y, where the primary focus was on financial obligations and DNA testing costs. The court had to determine the financial contributions of the parties, specifically regarding the payment of costs associated with DNA testing and other financial liabilities.

The legal issues at the core of this case revolved around the interpretation of previous court orders and the financial responsibilities of the respondents towards the applicant. The court needed to ascertain whether the respondents were liable to pay specific sums as directed by prior orders and to clarify the financial obligations concerning the DNA testing costs.

In its reasoning, the court meticulously reviewed the previous orders and the agreements between the parties. It confirmed that the First Respondent was indeed obligated to pay a specific sum to the Applicant, as per the terms of the earlier Family Court orders. Furthermore, the court ruled that the First Respondent must also cover the costs of the DNA testing, which were incurred by the Applicant. Additionally, the court found that the Second Respondent had a financial obligation to the Applicant, necessitating payment of a particular amount. The court concluded that the First Respondent's payment to the Applicant must be made before any recovery from the Second Respondent, and it mandated specific payment deadlines for these sums.

The final orders issued by the court required the First Respondent to pay $21,953.80 to the Applicant, minus any recovery from the Second Respondent, and to additionally cover the DNA testing costs of $742.50. Furthermore, the Second Respondent was ordered to pay $750.32 to the Applicant. The court set precise timelines for these payments, ensuring that the First Respondent's obligations were fulfilled before any reimbursement from the Second Respondent.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

That, on or before the date on which she receives payment pursuant to Order 2 of the Orders made in the Family Court of Australia on

9 August 1999, the First Respondent pay to the Applicant the sum of $21,953.80 less any amount recovered by the Applicant from the Second Respondent as referred to herein.

2.

That within 28 days of the date of these orders, the First Respondent pay to the Applicant the sum of $742.50 being the cost of DNA testing carried out by Silbase Scientific Services.

3.

That the Second Respondent pay to the Applicant the sum of $750.32.

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.