Carey v Carey [2007] FCA 2045

Carey v Carey [2007] FCA 2045

The application was dismissed because the proposed separate question was raised too late and was not considered useful, and because the evidence did not justify vacating or varying the orders: there was an apparent inconsistency between Mr Carey's statements to Mr Beilby and his earlier evidence, and there was no evidence as to when the Respondent could attend in Australia despite evidence of his wife's pregnancy.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Application to Vacate or Vary Orders Made on 29 November 2007 / Interlocutory Application Heard and Dismissed on 6 December 2007
Outcome
The Application to vacate or vary the orders of 29 November 2007 was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['vacating or Varying Orders' 'separate Question' 'attendance in Person' 'federal Court Rules']
['civil Procedure'] ['vacating or Varying Orders' 'separate Question' 'attendance in Person' 'federal Court Rules']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application to Vacate or Vary Orders Made on 29 November 2007 / Interlocutory Application Heard and Dismissed on 6 December 2007

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the orders made on 29 November 2007 should be vacated or varied.' "Whether a preliminary question as to the Court's jurisdiction to make orders pursuant to O 15A r 12 should be determined under O 29 r 2 of the Federal Court Rules." "Whether the Respondent's work commitments in Rotterdam and his wife's pregnancy justified varying the hearing dates or the requirement that he attend in person."]

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the proposed separate question was raised too late and was not considered useful, and because the evidence did not justify vacating or varying the orders: there was an apparent inconsistency between Mr Carey's statements to Mr Beilby and his earlier evidence, and there was no evidence as to when the Respondent could attend in Australia despite evidence of his wife's pregnancy.

Court Disposition

The Application to vacate or vary the orders of 29 November 2007 was dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The Application to vacate or vary the orders of 29 November 2007 be dismissed.' "The Respondent to pay the Applicants' costs of the proceedings today." 'The matter be stood over for further mention at 9:15am on 10 December 2007.']