Family Law

Whilst the majority of the legal profession was and remains staunchly opposed to the merger of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court, the reality is that it will be upon us soon and we must adjust to the new systems in place. It is important also that our clients know the changes that are soon to occur in the system that they may be litigating in, or considering entering.

With thanks to Jacky Campbell at Forte Family Lawyers Gold Coast (published via www.cch.com.au) here are the ten most important things to know about the merger:

1. The Court will now be known as The Federal Circuit Court and Family Court of Australia.
2. The new Court will commence operation on 1 September 2021.
3. There will only be one Court, but there will be two divisions of that Court. What is currently known as the Family Court of Australia, will become the Federal Circuit Court and Family Court of Australia (Division 1).  The Federal Circuit Court of Australia will become the Federal Circuit Court and Family Court of Australia (Division 2).
4. All proceedings will be commenced in Division 2. All appeals will be filed in Division 1.
5. Division 2 will also hear general federal law matters as well as Family law.
6. Whilst all Appeals will be heard in Division 1, the Chief Justice can also direct that a matter be transferred from Division 2 to Division 1 in particular circumstances.
7. There is no appeal from the decision of the Chief Justice to transfer or refuse to transfer a matter from Division 2 to Division 1.
8. There will be new Rules of Court to abide by.
9. The Federal Government has indicated that there will be 35 specialist Judges in Division 1 and 43 in Division 2 (nationwide).
10. There is a diversity of view on whether or not this new system will be better than our current one. Most of us agree that the new court won’t be better unless the Government provides it with more resources.

To a greater or lesser extent, we are very much in wait and see mode.  Watch this space.

In 2021 Australia, pets are without doubt an integral part of the majority of families. With the decision to defer having children until later in life or not at all, couples after separation are often faced with the decision about who gets “custody” of the dog (or cat or both!).

If parties can reach a private arrangement about what happens with the family pet, then that is one thing, but what happens when you can’t?

In a recently published decision of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia in Brisbane, Her Honour Judge Turner has looked carefully at the capacity of the family law courts to determine disputes, on an interim basis about the “custody” of pet dogs.

On 10 February 2021, the Court published Davenport & Davenport (No.2) [2020] FCCA 2766 (8 October 2020) (austlii.edu.au) in which the Court was tasked with deciding a self-represented Husband’s application for an interim “shared custody” arrangement for a dog.

For reasons that we will explore, Her Honour decided there was no jurisdiction to make any such Order.

After a short relationship, during which no children were born, the Wife made an Application for property adjustment Orders under s79 of the Family Law Act.  These types of applications fall within the definition of “matrimonial cause” under s4 of the Family Law Act which defines a ‘matrimonial cause” as

Proceedings between the parties to a marriage with respect to the property of the parties to the  marriage or either of them, being proceedings (i) arising out of the marital relationship.

The wife, on a final basis, sought to retain possession of the dog, conveniently referred to “D”.  There was a dispute between the parties regarding who paid for him etc but that was a matter for a final decision.

Dogs have long been treated by the family law courts as “personal property” which is defined in the Butterworths Legal Dictionary as “all forms of property other than real property; that is all forms of property other than land and interests in land (excluding leaseholds).  Personal property is traditionally divided into two classes: chattels real and chattels personal. A “chattel” is a movable possession and can be considered something capable of being the subject of action possession (a “chose” in possession”) or something that cannot be physically possessed but recoverable by a course of action (“a chose in action).

Importantly, as the Wife sought Orders on a final basis regarding possession of the dog, the Court confirmed that it had jurisdiction to hear that final application, but the Husband’s application was an interim one, which brought with it different considerations.  The Court considered that the interim application was not one for the adjustment of property interests and did not therefore fall within Part VIIII of the Family Law Act.  The Court further relied upon the decision (one of many!) in Strahan and Strahan (interim property orders) within which the Court determined that there must be jurisdiction to make interim property orders before they could be considered.

The Husband did not assist the Court in providing any authority or legislation which addressed whether the Court had jurisdiction to deal with “shared custody” of “D” the dog. The Family Law Act previously referred to “custody” however it pertained to children, the definition of which, obviously does not include dogs.  The Application therefore did not fall within the category of interim parenting decisions, which the Court could have entertained.

The Court relied upon the authority of Gaynor & Tseh [2018] FamCA 164 when confirming that the Court had no jurisdiction to make the Orders sought by the Husband.  In that authority the Court stated:

Th Family Law Act makes no reference to pets.  It was conceded by the applicant that a dog does not fit within any other category of property than a chattel. Hard as that may be for the applicant, and perhaps other dog lovers to accept, the law here concerns the alteration of interests in property. Most significantly, the issue is the question of the alteration of a property interest on an interim basis.

Whilst sympathizing with the Husband and dismissing his application for want of jurisdiction, Her Honour concluded by saying:

The Court is aware that for many people pets are regarded as members of the family however there is no provision under the Family Law Act and no specific legislation that deals with issues such as the “custody” of a pet whether that be a dog, cat, bird, lizard, fish or any of the wonderful creates that we share the planet with that would empower the court to make orders for shared custody of a pet.

The case highlights further why reaching an agreement (which can include matters which otherwise the Court may not permit) is the best outcome for all concerned, including your dog! Contact Gold Coast family lawyer for your free preliminary discussion about your family law issues (pet-related or otherwise).

The focus of articles such as those in the Courier Mail regarding the separation of Wally and Jackie Lewis draws attention to factors that have long been replaced in the Family Law system – see Wally Lewis: Secret betrayal that tore Lewis family apart | The Courier Mail.

References to alleged affairs of long or short-term duration are a constant factor in any reporting of celebrity divorces. And the reality is, is that from a legal perspective, these factors are irrelevant, but for selling your gossip magazines it’s a different story.

Prior to 1975 in Australia, should you wish to get divorced, you would have had to establish one of 14 grounds included into the Matrimonial Causes Act, these include:

• Desertion
• Adultery
• Habitual drunkenness
• Cruelty
• Insanity
• Imprisonment

Gaining evidence of any of the divorce grounds was a cloak and dagger exercise, involving private investigators and other covert methods.  This fault base or moralistic approach was deeply rooted in the religious principles underpinning marriage in that era.

However, come the 1960’s those moralistic and religious viewpoints had become out of sync with modern Australia.

A huge groundswell movement emerged in the 1960’s which shifted the viewpoint on marriage and during this time the increasing numbers of defacto couples increased also.

Fast forward to 1972 the then Whitlam Government introduced a series of reforms including those proposed to the laws pertaining to divorce and “custody” as it was then known as.

In 1975 the Family Law Act was passed into law, with a firm majority of votes (80-41).  The Family Law Act introduced “no fault” divorce and boy did Australian’s take to the changes. A massive surge in divorce applications occurred after the passage of the Family Law Act and the court has effectively been swamped since that day.

In order to obtain a divorce pursuant to the Family Law Act, all that is required to be established is that the marriage has “irretrievably” broken down for a period of 12 months prior to the application being made.  The Court does have to consider whether or not appropriate arrangements are in place for children under the age of 18 as part of the consideration of the divorce Application.

Conduct issues in family law are mostly irrelevant. There are but a few exceptions to this standard position. Whilst it is entirely understandable that the reasons for the end of your relationship have a massive emotional impact, as your advisor, it is our job to ensure that your matter is conducted in a way that complies with the case authorities and relevant legislation.

So in 2021, your divorce application will look dramatically different to how it would have pre-1975, remembering that an Application for Divorce is an entirely different legal process to the division of assets and reaching an agreement, however again fault or conduct issues become relevant in limited circumstances.

Strategic and resolution-focused advice is what OMB Family Law, the top-rated firm of Family Lawyers Gold Coast, is all about.  If there are relevant conduct issues that will impact the division of your assets or the living arrangements for your children, then we will provide you with clear advice on how those issues are relevant and the impact they will have.

Contact Gold Coast Divorce Lawyer on 5555 0000 or via our website omb.com.au for a free initial discussion with OMB Gold Coast lawyers.

“It’s the most wonderful time of the year….” Or so the Christmas song goes.

But statistically, this is not always the case for families under stress. The period immediately preceding Christmas and post-Christmas often causes such stress that pre-existing problems are brought to the surface and relationships often end.

The desire for a fresh start in the New Year or just getting through “one more Christmas” often prompts parties to consult with Gold Coast Family Lawyers regarding separating before or after the holiday period.

If you have separated, it is very important that as parents, we shield our children from as much of the adult issues as we can. Children observe and take in much more than we give them credit for. They pick up on stress and conflict through observations of actions, moods, and direct conflict.

When it comes to children’s arrangements, the Court’s will always make an Order which it considers to be in the child’s best interests.

Whether this is sharing Christmas Day or alternating it between parents is entirely subject to the individual aspects of each case.

OMB Family Law’s gift to you is our “helpful holiday hints” – namely some things to consider in the lead up to the festive season and when you are discussing and hopefully agreeing on the arrangements for your child or children and other family law matters this holiday period:

1. Christmas is for and about children, let them enjoy it, free from the worry of their parent’s conflict.
2. Christmas can cause conflict and anxiety in even the happiest of households, so if there are conflicts in your relationship with the other parent then it is your responsibility to do all that you can to ensure that the children are not exposed to conflict or adult disputes;
3. The arrangements for Christmas Day must be child focused, not parent focused. Your “need” as a parent to see your child or children on Christmas Day is secondary to the best interests of your children and in all reality, of little concern or interest to the Court.  Christmas is only one day of the year and whilst it may be nice to be spending it as a family, life does not always work that way. Be the adult and be child focused.
4. Try to communicate with each other about present(s) for the children to ensure that there is a consistent approach on type of present and there is no double up.
5. If you can, make sure arrangements for the special days are resolved well before the holiday period, as your advisors and the Courts will close in the days leading up to Christmas. This enables the stress levels for all concerned to be managed as well as enabling plans with immediate and extended family to be made.
6. The capacity to bring a matter before the Court prior to Christmas is quite difficult as there is, notoriously, a lot of families which need court intervention prior to the Christmas period. Bear that in mind when trying to resolve matters.
7. If you cannot achieve a Court order prior to Christmas, then a Parenting Plan is the best option available to you. A parenting plan, whilst not a Court Order which carries differing levels of enforceability and consequences for breach, is still a written agreement which the Court will consider if needs be. As the old adage says, “anything is better than nothing”.
8. Do not sweat the small stuff, pick your battles, rise above it – all of those colloquialisms apply best at Christmas. It is not the time to worry about someone being five minutes late to changeover or if the kids go on (and on and on) about a present from their other parent.
9. Be generous and kind if you can. If you are in a better financial position then your spouse, do not put the squeeze on them financially (ever but definitely not at Christmas).  They are the person you chose to have a family with and being difficult financially will only affect your children, in the long run.
10. Plan for things going wrong. A dream Christmas would be perfect, but we don’t live in a perfect world and there are no perfect parents (sorry to say!).  Small issues should be noted down and raised with your advisor in the new year. Big issues – significant breaches, family violence or risk factors from alcohol consumption – need to be addressed more urgently and if needs be, contact the Police to ensure your and the children’s safety is protected.
11. Get advice early. Your family lawyer is a human too – they likely have family of their own and need time to rest and relax so that they are refreshed and available to you in the New Year. If a matter is urgent then, like us at OMB Family Law, they ought to be available to you via email, but otherwise decide to have your meetings well prior to their Christmas closure. Again, if personal safety is at risk, then call 000 without delay.
12. Finally, remember what Christmas is truly about – love, family, friendship, and gratitude for being in the best country around. 2020 has posed many challenges for our day to day Aussie life.  Take time this year (and every year) to truly remember the meaning of the holidays.  It is not a time to focus on winning against your ex, who is getting the kids the best presents or having the best holiday.  Kids just want their parents and deep down the competition is likely to just make them sad.

From the OMB Solicitors to yours, may your holiday season bring you happiness (or at least as little conflict as possible), rest, and relaxation?

Our office is open until 23 December 2020 for any family law issues that may arise prior to Christmas and is available for urgent issues over the holidays.

“I have a simple agreement, I just need it witnessed”.

If I had a dollar for every time I had heard that in the years since Binding Financial Agreements became part of the Family Law landscape in Australia.

One of the major protective measures for family law litigants proposing to sign a Binding Financial Agreement is the requirement for them both to have received independent legal advice prior to signing the agreement. This advice must truly be independent.

This requirement is provided for in the Family Law Act (the ‘Act”).  The advice that is required to be given by a party’s lawyer is specifically about:

1. The effect of the agreement upon the rights of the party; and
2. The advantages and disadvantages to the party, at the time the advice is being given, in signing the agreement.

If this advice is not given, then a BFA can be declared not binding upon the parties.

A very clear example of the effect of failing to receive such independent advice is the case of Purdey & Millington [2018] FCCA 213 – see full decision here

In this matter:

• The parties married in 2003 and separated in or around 2014.
• There were two minor children of the relationship who were living with the Wife.
• The parties signed a BFA on 16 September 2014.
• In August 2017 the Wife applied to have the BFA declared not binding upon the parties – thus giving rise to an ability to claim property settlement.

The Wife asserted that she did not receive appropriate independent legal advice despite the document certifying that the requisite legal advice was provided.

The Wife’s case was that, after having some informal discussions, she went with the Husband to his Solicitor on 16 September 2014, to draw up what she believed to a separation agreement but that it was only to deal with some aspects of their property settlement not all of them.  She believed that in Australia, you had to sign papers with a Solicitor to be considered formally separated.

After the meeting with the Husband’s Solicitor, the Husband then took the Wife to a meeting with a Solicitor who had been arranged for her.

The Husband asserted he took the Wife to the Solicitor as she “didn’t know how to get there”.

The Wife asserted that the Husband was present during the meeting with her Solicitor, which the Husband denied (saying he only came in at the start and at the end).

The Husband agreed that he paid for the Wife’s legal advice.

During her evidence, the Solicitor for the Wife stated as follows:

• The Wife was referred to her by the Solicitor for the Husband.
• She could not recall if the Husband was present during the meeting.
• She had received a copy of the BFA two or three days before the meeting.
• That during the meeting she went through the relevant provisions of the Act in relation to the effect of the document and went through each page so that the Wife would understand what was “going on”.
• She spoke with the Wife in English during the meeting.
• She did not ask the Wife if she required an interpreter.
• She had kept file notes of the meeting with the Wife.

The Court found that the Wife’s Solicitor who was by then not practicing, was not a witness of truth for the following reasons:

1. The firm at which the Solicitor was practising at the time had no file opened in the name of the Wife; and
2. She did not produce the file notes which she asserted in oral evidence were in existence.

Ultimately the Court found that the Wife had displaced the inference which could be drawn by the certificate annexed to the Financial Agreement and held:

• The arrangement for the Wife to receive legal advice was not made independently with the Wife, rather it was arranged by the Husband.
• The meeting, which endured for a maximum of 20 minutes, was insufficient for appropriate advice to be given to the Wife in any circumstances, even more so when she had limited English skills.
• The Husband was responsible for and paid for the legal fees of the Wife.
• The Husband was present for the duration of the meeting between the Wife and the Wife’s Solicitor.
• In the absence of file notes to support an inference of proper engagement in the wife, it could not be found that the Wife received competent legal service or the provision of any advice at all.

The Court referred the matter back for resolution through the usual litigation process.

This case highlights the utmost importance of obtaining proper and independent advice prior to signing a Binding Financial Agreement.

Best case practice requires that there be a number of discussions between a party and their lawyer prior to signing a Binding Financial Agreement and further that the independent legal advice be given in writing and acknowledged by the client as having been received. This is particularly important when the circumstances of the agreement are such that the client is being advised not to sign the document.  This practice is adopted irrespective of the manner in which the matter was referred to the family law team at OMB Solicitors.

Whilst this practice may seem unnecessary when parties are in agreement as to their property settlement, it is done to ensure that the Binding Financial Agreement is considered as binding as possible.

To ensure that your Binding Financial Agreement complies with all relevant legislative requirements and that you receive proper and independent legal advice, contact our Gold Coast Family Lawyers team for advice.

In response to concerns about delays in the Family Court system, particularly for matters with a small asset pool, the Federal Circuit Court has developed the Family Law Priority Property Pool 500 List (PPP500).

It is a specialist list designed for matters where the net assets of the parties including superannuation is or is likely to be less than $500,000.  Additionally, there must not be any Trusts or Corporate Structures which would require expert investigation and the matter cannot involve any other aspect of Family Law, such as parenting or child support issues.

The PPP500 has specialized case management processes comprising:

1. Registrar led resolution where couples are assisted in reaching agreement in the shortest possible time; and
2. Short form Judge managed lists which apply a procedurally simpler process to the determination phase of a matter.

Close monitoring and scrutiny will be had of compliance with orders for disclosure and valuation with a focus on reducing delays and provide the parties with expanded opportunities to take ownership of their dispute resolution.

The two phases of the PPP500 proceed, in a general sense as follows:

In the PPP500, the usual requirement for filing of an Affidavit and Financial Statement is dispensed with, resulting in the costs to commence proceedings being greatly reduced.  There is a specific PPP500 Financial Summary document which is to be filed at the time of filing the Application or Response.

Stages 1 – 4 set out above are expected to be completed within 90 days of filing where possible and the trial process is expected to be conducted promptly and if possible without the need for traditional trial (which results in delays).

The process is expected to and has to date, produced expeditious and effective results in matters which are simple and have asset pools which are not conducive to lengthy delays in the Court system which would result in the asset pool being eroded by significant legal fees.

Of course the process requires practitioners and parties who are focused on resolution and focusing on the big picture rather than the small minute details.

How can OMB Family Law help?

Our Family Lawyers Gold Coast at OMB Solicitors have focused on prompt and efficient resolution of matters which result in parties exiting the Family Law system without lengthy delays.  With strategic and pragmatic advice we will guide you through your property settlement matter and recommend the use of the PPP500 where appropriate and necessary.

In August 2020, the Family Law Courts (the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court) launched The Lighthouse Project, being piloted through a handful of Registries, of which Brisbane is one.

It is the Court’s recognition that the intersection between Family Violence and the Family Law system is complex and requires specific and detailed attention.

The Lighthouse Project is a screening and management program to assess risk to families within the system and having a focus on improving outcomes for families in the family law system.

The project involves:

1. Early Risk Screening through a secure online platform

When an Application for Parenting Orders is filed through the online court portal, the parties will be asked to complete a confidential and secure questionnaire via the Family DOORS Triage. 

2. Triage

The Family DOORS Triage system has been specially designed for Family Law and considers a range of safety risks that arise frequently in family law matters.  The answers to the questionnaire are referred to a highly skilled team of family counsellors who will assess risk as being HIGH, MEDIUM and LOW risk.

High-Risk cases will be referred for immediate action through a video, telephone or face to face conference with a family counsellor.   The Counsellor will provide a detailed risk assessment, safety and wellbeing plan for the person and referrals to appropriate support services.

Medium Risk cases will be offered safety planning and service referrals and will be considered for a range of case management pathways based on the individual needs of the case.

Low-Risk cases will be processed through court-ordered dispute resolution.

3. Case Management

After assessment through the Family Doors Triage system, the matter will be dealt with by a dedicated team of highly skilled professionals including registrars, family consultants and support staff with specialized training in family safety risks and family violence.

4. The Evatt List

Those families assessed as being High Risk and most vulnerable will have their matter managed through the Evatt List which focuses on early information gathering and intervention, through a judge-led support team.  This team will have specialized training and experience in working with families who are at high risk.

Why The Lighthouse Project?

It is the Court’s response to calls for the family law system to deal with family violence and risk better.  These calls have been made in a number of reports and commissions over the last 10 years.

It is a detailed and dedicated response to a growing crisis in our community, with statistics showing that women, men and children are at increased risk of death or injury at the hands of their partner or parent.

How can Gold Coast Family Lawyers help?

When taking instructions from you, concerns about family violence and risk of abuse and harm are discussed such that we can assess the best way to proceed with your matter.  Upon receiving instructions from you to commence proceedings we will work with you to complete the necessary screening questionnaire through The Lighthouse Project and be with you every step of the way through your parenting matter. Our Gold Coast Family Lawyers here to help you.