Concerns over Obscenely High Legal Costs in Family Law Proceedings

The court deems legal costs excessive in a family law case, prompting an investigation into possible professional misconduct. Parties settled parenting and property matters, but child support remained unresolved due to lack of notice. Mother paid $286k in fees, estimated $120k more, while father incurred $331,765 in fees, estimated $165k more. Inflammatory and unnecessary correspondence between solicitors raised concerns. Court highlights duty to minimize costs and reduce conflict, forwarding case documents for investigation into solicitors' conduct. #FamilyLaw #LegalMisconduct.

Court Rules on Alleged Sexual Abuse and Custody of Child: Mother's Appeal Rejected

In the case of Cogger & Druce (No 3) [2023], the primary judge found that the child was not at risk with unsupervised time with the father, but was at risk of psychological and emotional harm if living with the mother or if her time with the mother remained unsupervised. The mother appealed on three grounds, but the primary judge's credit findings were not challenged. The appeal was ultimately rejected. The primary judge's reasons for the indefinite supervised time were thoroughly examined, and the delay in judgment did not warrant a new decision. The mother is responsible for the costs associated with the supervised time at a contact center.

Court Rules in Favor of Father Seeking Custody of Child with Autism Spectrum Disorder 

In this case, a family that moved to Australia in 2014 has experienced separation and allegations of misconduct. The court is tasked with determining parental responsibility for the child and the type of contact allowed between the child and the mother. The parents have an unhappy relationship, and the mother made serious allegations against the father regarding his conduct towards the child. The court found that the mother minimized her own behavior and left the former matrimonial home with the child without the father's consent. After a period of no contact with the father, he now seeks for the child to live with him and have contact with the mother, while the mother wants sole parental responsibility and no contact with the father. The main issue is whether the mother's case of family violence by the father has been established. The court grants sole parental responsibility to the father and outlines specific visitation arrangements for the child with the mother, including supervised and unsupervised visits. The order also includes restrictions on negative speech and physical discipline, and grants permissions to the Independent Children's Lawyer to provide certain documents to the Department of Communities and Justice.

Appellant Seeks to Reopen Appeal, Present New Evidence in Parenting Order Dispute
The case involves an appellant who is dissatisfied with a court decision regarding parenting orders for her child. She filed an application to reopen the appeal, intending to include previously excluded evidence and introduce new evidence that could impact the trial and appeal outcomes. However, the application was dismissed, and the respondent's costs associated with this application were reserved for the appeal. The main issue was the appellant's dissatisfaction with the final parenting orders made by the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The orders involved the child transitioning from the appellant's primary care to the respondent's sole care and sole parental responsibility, with the appellant having supervised time with the child. The applicable law in this case was Baghti & Baghti and Ors (No 2) [2014] FamCAFC 204.

Dispute over 13 Year De Facto Relationship and Property Interests

Greyson & Maher is a property dispute case between two self-employed professionals who were in a de facto relationship for 13 years from 2006 until 2019.

The applicant made the majority of the financial contributions throughout the relationship, and the respondent made most of the non-financial contributions.

The parties agreed to keep their finances separate, except for a property they purchased together.

The respondent sought a 38% share of the asset pool, including the applicant's shareholding in H Ltd. The applicant sought a 50% interest in the B Street property, while the respondent initially sought to retain it.

The court ruled that the respondent has the option to acquire the applicant's one-half interest in B Street within 30 days of the orders or pay $1,100,000, otherwise the applicant has the option to acquire the respondent's one-half interest within 60 days with the same payment. If neither party exercises their option, the respondent must sell the property on the open market, with proceeds to be split equally between the parties.

Full Court overturns property adjustment decision in favor of wife in dispute with husband
In the case of Greer & Shui (No 2), the Full Court allowed the wife's appeal against the primary judge's finding that she made no contribution to a property in Suburb C, which was jointly owned by the couple. The court found that the primary judge's decision was based on a mistaken fact and his exercise of discretion was therefore wrong at law. The parties proposed a consent order for the husband to pay the wife an additional $200,000 within 14 days, which was agreed upon by both parties and falls within the broad range of discretion afforded by the Family Law Act. The court granted the wife a costs certificate.

Court Reviews Interim Parenting Orders for 12-Year-Old X After Separation of Parents

The Bradshaw & Bradshaw case involves a dispute over an order for a child to spend time with their mother. An independent children's lawyer was appointed, and the father raised issues with their conduct. The court dismissed the father's request to discharge the lawyer, stating that it is for the ICL to prepare their case as they see fit, and the onus is on the father to prove any grounds for discharge. Other orders sought by the father have been listed for hearing.

Court Must Decide Parental Responsibility Allocation and Amount of Time Child Should Spend With Father

In the case of Delisle & Mannion [2022] FedCFamC1F 940, the court is tasked with deciding on the allocation of parental responsibility and the amount of time the child should spend with the father, who currently has supervised visits. Both parties provided evidence with the help of an Independent Children's Lawyer and a consultant psychiatrist. The father has a history of family violence, alcohol, and drug misuse, impulse control, and anger management issues, and was found guilty of five criminal charges. In the end, the court granted sole parental responsibility to the mother, with the father having visitation rights on certain dates and times, some of which are supervised, and with certain rules to follow. The mother is allowed to take the child outside the country, and the father must complete an 18-week behavior change program. The application for costs is dismissed.

Court Grants Access to Documents, Redacting Information to Protect Lady's Privacy

This case involved a review of a Registrar's decision to give the wife's solicitors first access to subpoenaed material in order to protect the wife and child, who were the subject of an Apprehended Domestic Violence Order and an ongoing investigation by the Joint Investigation Response Team. The Registrar's approach was found to be appropriate, and the application was dismissed. The Court allowed the parties to inspect documents produced by certain entities, and dismissed the husband's application for a review of the orders made in respect of the inspection of documents produced by one of the entities. The ultimate question regarding access to unredacted documents will be answered by the trial judge. The applicable law was Family Law Rules 2004 r 17.02A(b).