Zao and Gong

[2020] FamCA 621

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

ZAO & GONG [2020] FamCA 621

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application – Summary dismissal – Where the wife makes an application seeking to summarily dismiss husband’s application for Orders under section 79 of the Family Law Act (Cth) – Discussion of the principles applying to applications for summary dismissal – Finding that husband has an arguable case – Wife’s application for summary dismissal dismissed.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss 45A, 79A

Friar & Friar [2011] FamCAFC 71
Beck & Beck (2004) FLC 93-181
Bigg & Suzi (1998) FLC 92-799

Lindon v The Commonwealth (No 2) (1996) 136 ALR 251; [1996] HCA 14

Pelerman & Pelerman (2000) 93-037
Ritter & Ritter and Anor [2020] FamCACF 86
Webster & Lampard (1993) 177 CLR 598 at 608

APPLICANT: Mr Zao

RESPONDENT: Ms Gong

FILE NUMBER: SYC 2998 of 2018

DATE DELIVERED: 31 July 2020

PLACE DELIVERED: Sydney

PLACE HEARD: Sydney

JUDGMENT OF: Henderson J

HEARING DATE: 29 May 2020

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Livingstone

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Sunfield Chambers Solicitors

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Lloyd SC

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: JC Legal Practice

Orders

1. The wife’s Application in a Case filed 16 March 2020 is dismissed.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

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

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 r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY

FILE NUMBER: SYC 2998 of 2018

Mr Zao

Applicant

And

Ms Gong

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The matter of Zao & Gong is an application by the respondent wife to summarily dismiss the husband’s application for property relief filed in the Family Court on 14 May 2018.

2. That application sought final property orders as follows:

   That the Applicant Husband be paid $2.5 million from the complying investment funds relating to the Applicant Husband’s and the Respondent Wife’s sub-class 188 (significant visa stream) visa application, held by B Fund ACN …, the Trustee of B Fund ABN …, C Limited ACN … ABN …, the D Corporation and by any other entity upon fulfilment of the visa condition 8557 for the said visa.

DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON

1. The documents read and relied upon are as follows:

   a)For the wife:

   i)Application in a Case, filed 16 March 2020;

   ii)Affidavit of the wife, filed 16 March 2020;

   iii)Response to Final Orders, filed 27 August 2018;

   iv)Affidavit of the wife, filed 27 August 2018; and

   v)Written submissions prepared by Mr Lloyd SC on behalf of the wife, dated 9 March 2020.

   b)For…