Zao & Lee

[2023] FedCFamC1A 232

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

(DIVISION 1) APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Zao & Lee [2023] FedCFamC1A 232

Appeal from:

Zao & Lee [2023] FedCFamC1F 675

Appeal number:

NAA 251 of 2023

File number:

SYC 8556 of 2015

Judgment of:

MCCLELLAND DCJ, JARRETT & RIETHMULLER JJ

Date of judgment:

20 December 2023

Catchwords:

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – PROPERTY – Whether primary judge had “double dipped” in notionally adding back sums to the property pool – Where one add-back conceded by respondent – Evidence does not establish further add-backs were “double dipped” – Whether primary judge erred in not making any adjustment for non-disclosure by respondent – Where appellant’s case at trial did not seek an adjustment – Whether primary judge gave inadequate weight to appellant’s initial submissions – Set aside Order 2 of the orders made on 16 August, 2023 – Appeal otherwise dismissed.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 75(2), 79(2)

Cases cited:

CDJ v VAJ (1998) 197 CLR 172, 230–231; [1998] HCA 67

Gronow v Gronow (1979) 144 CLR 513, 519; [1979] HCA 63

Metwally v University of Wollongong (1985) 60 ALR 68, 71; [1985] HCA 28

Stanford v Stanford (2012) 247 CLR 108; [2012] HCA 52

Townsend and Townsend (1995) FLC 92-569; [1994] FamCA 144

Number of paragraphs:

74

Date of hearing:

4 December 2023

Place:

Sydney

Counsel for the Appellant:

Mr Fermanis

Solicitor for the Appellant:

Gramelis Attorneys

Counsel for the Respondent:

Ms Cohen

Solicitor for the Respondent:

Westlink Legal Pty Ltd

ORDERS

NAA 251 of 2023
SYC 8556 of 2015

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
DIVISION 1 APPELLATE JURISDICTION

BETWEEN:

MR ZAO

Appellant

AND:

MS LEE

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	MCCLELLAND DCJ, JARRETT & RIETHMULLER JJ
DATE OF ORDER:	20 DECEMBER 2023

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Set aside Order 2 of the orders of the primary judge made on 16 August, 2023 and in lieu thereof order:

Within 28 days of settlement of the sale, the respondent wife (“the wife”) is to pay the husband a lump sum (“the lump sum”) equivalent to any shortfall between the husband receiving all of the net sale proceeds plus $193,463.05, and 50 per cent of the net sale proceeds plus $1,513,883.02, failing which interest will accrue on the said sum in accordance with the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), its Rules and Regulations, calculated from 28 days from the date of settlement aforesaid.

2.Otherwise the appeal be dismissed.

3.The appellant pay the respondent’s costs of and incidental to the appeal fixed in the sum of $13,000.

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 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Section…