Comino v Kremetis & Anor [2023] NSWSC 32

Comino v Kremetis & Anor [2023] NSWSC 32

It is appropriate and mandatory under s 5(1)(b)(ii)(C) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (NSW) to transfer the proceedings to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1), because the interests of justice require a single determination of overlapping issues and the Division 1 Court has accrued jurisdiction; the reference in the NSW Act to 'Family Court' extends to the Division 1 Court after legislative reforms.

Parties
First Plaintiff: John Emanuel Comino; Second Plaintiff: Matina Comino; Third Plaintiff: Alfa Insurance Brokers Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Efi Kremetis; Second Defendant: Gregory Comino
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 February 2023
Procedural Posture
Procedural Ruling / Application for Transfer of Proceedings Under Cross Vesting Legislation
Outcome
Proceedings transferred to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1).
Legal Topics
Transfer of Proceedings, Jurisdiction, Accrued Jurisdiction, Statutory Construction
Civil Procedure Family Law Transfer of Proceedings Jurisdiction Accrued Jurisdiction Statutory Construction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 40 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Emanuel Comino

First Plaintiff

Matina Comino

Second Plaintiff

Alfa Insurance Brokers Pty Ltd

Third Plaintiff

Efi Kremetis

First Defendant

Gregory Comino

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Procedural Ruling / Application for Transfer of Proceedings Under Cross Vesting Legislation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court proceedings should be transferred to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1) under the cross-vesting scheme
  2. 2 Whether the reference to 'Family Court' in the NSW Act permits transfer to the Division 1 Court after naming changes
  3. 3 Whether the Division 1 Court has accrued jurisdiction over the debt claim

Ratio Decidendi

It is appropriate and mandatory under s 5(1)(b)(ii)(C) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (NSW) to transfer the proceedings to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1), because the interests of justice require a single determination of overlapping issues and the Division 1 Court has accrued jurisdiction; the reference in the NSW Act to 'Family Court' extends to the Division 1 Court after legislative reforms.

Court Disposition

Proceedings transferred to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1).

Orders

  • Order, pursuant to s 5(1)(b)(ii)(C) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (NSW), that the proceedings (2021/353072) be transferred to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1), Sydney Registry.
  • Order that the costs of parties in this court, other than the costs of this notice of motion, be reserved to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1).