Zau and Uong (No 2) - [2015] FamCAFC 150

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

ZAU & UONG (NO. 2)

[2015] FamCAFC 150

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – APPLICATIONS IN AN APPEAL – where the applicant seeks to review the exercise of power by the Appeal Registrar in refusing to order that the court and/or the respondent obtain the transcripts of the hearings before the trial judge and prepare the appeal books – Where the applicant is able to prepare extensive and detailed documents – Where there is no reason proffered by the applicant which would support an order being made requiring the respondent or the Appeal Registrar to prepare appeal books or meet the cost of obtaining transcripts of the hearings – Applications dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – APPEAL – NOTICES OF APPEAL – Where neither of the Notices of Appeal filed contain proper grounds of appeal – Where the child the subject of the proceedings will turn 18 years of age in six months – Where it is doubtful that the appeals will be able to be heard and determined prior to the child turning 18 years of age – Where once the child turns 18 years of age the Family Court of Australia no longer has jurisdiction in relation to him – Where the appellant does not understand the appeal process – Where there is no utility in either of the two appeals – Where there is no reasonable prospect of success in either appeal – Appeals dismissed.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

Zau & Uong [2014] FamCAFC 36

APPLICANT:

Ms Zau

RESPONDENT:

Mr Uong

FILE NUMBER:

MLC

3931

2012

APPEAL NUMBERS:	SOA	14	of	2015
SOA	18	of	2015

DATE DELIVERED:

23 July 2015

PLACE DELIVERED:

Melbourne

PLACE HEARD:

Melbourne

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT OF:

Strickland J

HEARING DATE:

23 July 2015

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:

Family Court of Australia

LOWER COURT JUDGMENT DATES:

7 May 2015 - Orders of Southern Appeal Registrar
4 February 2015

LOWER COURT MNC:

NA
[2015] FamCA 47
[2015] FamCA 56

REPRESENTATION

THE APPLICANT:

In person with interpreter

THE RESPONDENT:

In person – no appearance

Orders

In appeal no. SOA 14 of 2015

The application in an appeal filed on 13 May 2015 be dismissed.
The Notice of Appeal filed on 2 March 2015 be dismissed.
Paragraph 2 of the application in an appeal filed on 20 April 2015 be dismissed.

In appeal no SOA 18 of 2015

The application in an appeal filed on 13 May 2015 be dismissed.
The Notice of Appeal filed on 27 February 2015 be dismissed.

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

IN THE APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

Appeal Numbers: SOA 14 & 18 of 2015
File Number: MLC 3931 of 2012

Ms Zau

Applicant

And

Mr Uong

Respondent

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

This is a sad case in many respects. The proceedings…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Zau and Uong (No 2)

Details

AGLC: Zau and Uong (No 2) [2015] FamCAFC 150
Case: [2015] FamCAFC 150
Decision Date: 23 July 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Zau and Uong (No 2) involved an appeal from family law proceedings where the applicants sought to review the Registrar's decision not to order that the court or the respondent obtain transcripts and prepare appeal books. The applicants also sought to appeal decisions made by the Family Court regarding the care and custody of a child. The appeal was heard in the Family Court of Australia. The primary legal issue was whether the Appeal Registrar should be compelled to prepare appeal books and obtain transcripts. Additionally, the court had to determine if the grounds of appeal were sufficient and whether the appeals had any utility or reasonable prospect of success.

The court found that the applicants had the capacity to prepare detailed documents themselves, and there was no justification for compelling the respondent or the Appeal Registrar to prepare appeal books or bear the cost of obtaining transcripts. The court also noted that neither of the Notices of Appeal contained proper grounds of appeal. Furthermore, the court was concerned that the child would turn 18 within six months, after which the Family Court would lose jurisdiction. The court found that the appellant did not understand the appeal process, and there was no utility in either appeal nor a reasonable prospect of success.

The court dismissed the applications to review the Registrar's decisions and both appeals. The court found that the applicants' lack of understanding of the appeal process, the absence of proper grounds of appeal, and the impending loss of jurisdiction over the child rendered the appeals futile. The court also found that the appeals did not have a reasonable prospect of success. Consequently, the court dismissed the applications and the appeals, and made orders to that effect.

Orders

Orders of the court

In appeal no. SOA 14 of 2015

The application in an appeal filed on 13 May 2015 be dismissed.

The Notice of Appeal filed on 2 March 2015 be dismissed.

Paragraph 2 of the application in an appeal filed on 20 April 2015 be dismissed.

In appeal no SOA 18 of 2015

The application in an appeal filed on 13 May 2015 be dismissed.

The Notice of Appeal filed on 27 February 2015 be dismissed.

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.