Case Outcomes
FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Evans Brandon Family Lawyers are a reputable firm of Gold Coast Family Law experts. Our Partners are experienced Queensland Law Society Family Law Accredited Specialists and officially recognised as leading lawyers in Divorce and Family Law Services
Colbert & Colbert [2022] FedCFamC2F1090 (18 August 2022)
This case dealt with property settlement proceedings following a relationship of 18 years.
The wife failed to engage in the proceedings and the matter proceeded on the basis of an undefended hearing. Not only did the wife not participate in the proceedings, but she also conducted herself in such a manner that her actions caused the family business to be abandoned, a commercial property to be sold and ultimately the family company to be placed into liquidation.
The wife had the use of and access to significant assets and cash and did not account for any of it.
The Court recognised that the wife’s conduct was responsible for the loss assets, including the loss of the family business.
The wife’s conduct was noted as some of the worst seen in the Court and was undertaken with malicious intent.
It was ordered that any entitlement the wife may receive would be paid to the Second Respondent, being the liquidator for the company that operated the family business.
In addition, the wife was ordered to pay the husband’s costs in the fixed amount of $100,000.
The Judge commented that “in my view the conduct of the First Respondent wife puts this case in the category of special or unusual …. it is perhaps some of the worst conduct that this Court has seen for quite some time”.
The Judge held that a costs order in the sum of $100,000 was appropriate and justified due to the significant additional costs the husband was put to in the proceedings not only attempting to have the wife engage in the proceedings but also to assist the court to determine the nature and value of the property pool.
Dean Evans of Evans Brandon Family Lawyers acted on behalf of the wife.
Luxton & Rodley (No. 3) [2024] FedCFamC1F452
The parties to this matter sought that the Court make Final Orders concerning parenting matters by consent. These Orders would provide for the 2 children to live with each party in an equal time arrangement.
The children were twins born in 2016 and at the time of the separation in July 2022, were approximately 6 years old.
The mother had made allegations against the father resulting in Orders that the father’s time with the children be supervised. Hair follicle testing was undertaken by the father because of allegations made by the mother that the father was an abuser of alcohol and/or illicit substances.
In this case the parents had a clear disdain towards each other. The mother had made serious allegations against the Father including that he had poisoned the family dog, interfered with coffee purchased for the mother, poisoned the household water supply, interfered with electronic devices, stalked medical practitioners, followed the mother and her family, attended at the mother’s residence, left an axe in the mother’s yard, listened to the mother’s conversations and hacked and accessed the mother’s email account. The father denied these allegations.
The Court noted that this was the first judgment given in some form that adopts the new pathway for parenting matters.
The judgment includes a discussion of the role of a parenting co-ordinator as designed to keep parents who have the capacity to be focused and directed to their children’s best interests on track.
The Court commented that parental conflict is created by parents. Parental conflict is stopped by parents. Parents need to change the way they have acted to date and in future demonstrate to their children how important it is for them to both have a loving mother and father who want the best for them.
Dean Evans of Evans Brandon Family Lawyers acted on behalf of the father.
Bligh & Vello [2024] FedCFamC1F291
The father made application for ‘reunification therapy’.
Prior proceedings had found that the father was an unacceptable risk to the child. The matter had been dealt with on a final basis but tragically, the mother had passed away following these final orders.
The child had not spent any time with the father since July 2015. At that time the child was almost 4 years of age. In 2024 when this matter was heard he was 13 years of age.
At the time of the final hearing being determined in April 2023 the court held that even supervised video contact between the father and child would expose the child to an unacceptable risk of harm by the father.
Following the mother’s death, the court held that if this matter was to be considered further by the court, the father would need to meet the costs of the Family Report writer.
Dean Evans of Evans Brandon Family Lawyers acted on behalf of the deceased mother and later the child’s guardian.
Defries & Kemeny (No. 4) [2023] FedCFamC1F1106 (18 December 2023)
This was a complex property matter.
The parties had separated in September 2013. In late 2013 the wife was seriously assaulted by the husband in the former matrimonial home. The husband was acquitted subsequently in criminal proceedings of the charges in 2016. The wife then commenced civil proceedings against the husband, and a decision was made in her favour. A significant damages and costs award was made in the wife’s favour.
Subsequently on 25 September 2023 the husband presented a debtor’s petition and a trustee was appointed in respect of his bankrupt estate.
In October 2023 the trustee was joined to the family law proceedings and the hearing was to proceed on 12 December 2023. It was determined by the Court that the wife’s contributions, initially and throughout the relationship, favoured her and her contributions were assessed at 75%. Further, it was found that she suffered significant psychological trauma because of the husband’s assault in 2013 which impacted her capacity to function and handle day-to-day tasks. It was held that there should be an adjustment in her favour to reflect the highly likely reality that she will not recover any funds from the husband consequent upon the judgment entered in her favour in the Supreme Court and she will be left to bear the entirety of her legal costs associated with that proceeding.
In all likelihood, the husband would exit bankruptcy in September 2026 absolved of any obligation to pay the wife any further amounts ordered in the Supreme Court proceedings or the costs associated with them. It was held that the wife retain 77% of the total property of the parties of the marriage.
Dean Evans of Evans Brandon Family Lawyers acted on behalf of the wife.