Skip to main content

Family Law Education Network

Menu
Contact Us

Tag: Appeal

Jakobsson & Jakobsson (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1A 137

02/09/2025

The decision in Jakobsson & Jakobsson (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1A 137 involved a consideration of addbacks post the June 2025 amendments to the Family Law Act (‘FLA’). The matter came before His Honour, Schonell J, on appeal from a Division 2 Judge. Orders were made in December 2024, following the primary proceedings, involving, inter alia, a finding that the appellant had not accounted for funds removed from his Self-Managed Super Fund (SMSF) which were then added back on the Balance sheet.

| Read More

Friseal & Friseal [2025] FedCFamC1A 102

16/08/2025

At a time when family violence is foremost in our minds and there have been many changes to the legislation to recognise the impact of family violence it seems unusual that a Division 2 Judge would seem to completely dismiss verified instances of serious risk but that is what happened in Friseal & Friseal [2025] FedCFamC2F 75, a case in Hobart that also involved the Department for Education, Children and Young People (“the Department”) as an intervener.

| Read More

Zyma & Begum (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1A 109

16/08/2025

There are times when the Court makes Orders that are not in fact enforceable. That was the situation in Zyma & Begum (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1A 109, an appeal before Justice Christie from Division 2 Parenting Orders made on 20 January 2025, in Begum & Zyma [2025] FedCFamC2F 5. Those proceedings involved a child who was five years old at the time of the hearing in late 2024, albeit those proceedings had commenced in 2023.

| Read More

Catlin & Catlin [2025] FedCFamC1A 110

16/08/2025

The matter of Catlin & Catlin [2025] FedCFamC1A 110 was an Appeal filed by the husband in respect of the enforcement of property settlement Consent Orders, made on 22 July 2016. As at the date of filing her Enforcement Application the husband had not complied with any of the 2016 Orders. That Enforcement Application was heard and Orders made by Berman J on 7 February 2025.

| Read More

Daalman & Daalman – Wrong Path Taken: Review Dismissed, Appeal Denied

25/05/2025

Daalman & Daalman [2025] FedCFamC1A 33 was an appeal from a decision of a Div 2 Judge. Orders had been made in the lower proceedings in the absence of the appellant wife, dismissing her Application for Review of a registrar’s decision. Interim Orders had been made by a Senior Judicial Registrar for the sale of a property, an interim distribution to both parties and the balance of funds to be held in a controlled monies account pending the final hearing.

| Read More

Saidov & Saidov – Appealing Orders That No Longer Exist

19/05/2025

This was a decision of His Honour, Austin J, where the Appellant mother sought to appeal the refusal of an adjournment application made part way through the trial of the substantive proceedings. The mother had not attended Court on that day, during what was a very lengthy trial, and as a result the father sought Interim Orders pending the outcome of those proceedings. That was supported by the ICL and thereafter Interim Orders were made, on 6 February 2025, reversing the primary residence of the children and placing them in the father’s care. Further Interim Orders were made on 14 February 2025.

| Read More

Rapallino & Dekker – When One Appeal Fails, Don’t File Another

15/05/2025

Rapallino & Dekker (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC1A 60 was a decision of His Honour, Aldridge J, in respect of property settlement proceedings that had been before a Division 1 Judge. In those proceedings the Appellant Wife was to receive 65%of the asset pool. Thereafter the Appellant filed a Notice of Appeal, within time, and the appeal was then heard on 12 February 2025 by a full bench of their Honours, Aldridge, Gill & Strum JJ, and dismissed. At that point the issue of costs had not been determined with the parties to file written submissions in that regard.

| Read More

Sheridan & Delany – No Case, No Evidence, No Appeal Grounds

03/05/2025

This was an appeal before Schonell J from a decision of the Magistrates Court of Western Australia (Magistrates Court), with Judgment delivered on 7 March 2025. It was somewhat strange because the proceedings in the lower court had been undefended meaning that the appellant husband didn’t involve himself in those proceedings other than to constantly challenge the jurisdiction of the Court

| Read More

Unveiling the Power of the Overarching Principle

05/05/2024

The embedding of the principles established in section 190 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 into the Family Law Act as section 95 on 6 May 2023 emphasises the crucial role of the overarching purpose and how it is applied in Family Law matters.

| Read More

Jakobsson & Jakobsson (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1A 137

02/09/2025

The decision in Jakobsson & Jakobsson (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1A 137 involved a consideration of addbacks post the June 2025 amendments to the Family Law Act (‘FLA’). The matter came before His Honour, Schonell J, on appeal from a Division 2 Judge. Orders were made in December 2024, following the primary proceedings, involving, inter alia, a finding that the appellant had not accounted for funds removed from his Self-Managed Super Fund (SMSF) which were then added back on the Balance sheet.

| Read More

Friseal & Friseal [2025] FedCFamC1A 102

16/08/2025

At a time when family violence is foremost in our minds and there have been many changes to the legislation to recognise the impact of family violence it seems unusual that a Division 2 Judge would seem to completely dismiss verified instances of serious risk but that is what happened in Friseal & Friseal [2025] FedCFamC2F 75, a case in Hobart that also involved the Department for Education, Children and Young People (“the Department”) as an intervener.

| Read More

Zyma & Begum (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1A 109

16/08/2025

There are times when the Court makes Orders that are not in fact enforceable. That was the situation in Zyma & Begum (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1A 109, an appeal before Justice Christie from Division 2 Parenting Orders made on 20 January 2025, in Begum & Zyma [2025] FedCFamC2F 5. Those proceedings involved a child who was five years old at the time of the hearing in late 2024, albeit those proceedings had commenced in 2023.

| Read More

Catlin & Catlin [2025] FedCFamC1A 110

16/08/2025

The matter of Catlin & Catlin [2025] FedCFamC1A 110 was an Appeal filed by the husband in respect of the enforcement of property settlement Consent Orders, made on 22 July 2016. As at the date of filing her Enforcement Application the husband had not complied with any of the 2016 Orders. That Enforcement Application was heard and Orders made by Berman J on 7 February 2025.

| Read More

Daalman & Daalman – Wrong Path Taken: Review Dismissed, Appeal Denied

25/05/2025

Daalman & Daalman [2025] FedCFamC1A 33 was an appeal from a decision of a Div 2 Judge. Orders had been made in the lower proceedings in the absence of the appellant wife, dismissing her Application for Review of a registrar’s decision. Interim Orders had been made by a Senior Judicial Registrar for the sale of a property, an interim distribution to both parties and the balance of funds to be held in a controlled monies account pending the final hearing.

| Read More

Saidov & Saidov – Appealing Orders That No Longer Exist

19/05/2025

This was a decision of His Honour, Austin J, where the Appellant mother sought to appeal the refusal of an adjournment application made part way through the trial of the substantive proceedings. The mother had not attended Court on that day, during what was a very lengthy trial, and as a result the father sought Interim Orders pending the outcome of those proceedings. That was supported by the ICL and thereafter Interim Orders were made, on 6 February 2025, reversing the primary residence of the children and placing them in the father’s care. Further Interim Orders were made on 14 February 2025.

| Read More

Rapallino & Dekker – When One Appeal Fails, Don’t File Another

15/05/2025

Rapallino & Dekker (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC1A 60 was a decision of His Honour, Aldridge J, in respect of property settlement proceedings that had been before a Division 1 Judge. In those proceedings the Appellant Wife was to receive 65%of the asset pool. Thereafter the Appellant filed a Notice of Appeal, within time, and the appeal was then heard on 12 February 2025 by a full bench of their Honours, Aldridge, Gill & Strum JJ, and dismissed. At that point the issue of costs had not been determined with the parties to file written submissions in that regard.

| Read More

Sheridan & Delany – No Case, No Evidence, No Appeal Grounds

03/05/2025

This was an appeal before Schonell J from a decision of the Magistrates Court of Western Australia (Magistrates Court), with Judgment delivered on 7 March 2025. It was somewhat strange because the proceedings in the lower court had been undefended meaning that the appellant husband didn’t involve himself in those proceedings other than to constantly challenge the jurisdiction of the Court

| Read More

Unveiling the Power of the Overarching Principle

05/05/2024

The embedding of the principles established in section 190 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 into the Family Law Act as section 95 on 6 May 2023 emphasises the crucial role of the overarching purpose and how it is applied in Family Law matters.

| Read More

Most Read

Flow us

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Most Popular

Facebook-f Twitter Linkedin-in