Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Brief Case Summary: Pedrana & Pedrana (No 2) (2012) (No 2) (2012) FamCA 348 (15 May 2012)

    Uploaded by

    Corey Gauci
    221 views2 pages
    Brief Case Summary: Pedrana & Pedrana (No 2) [2012] FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – PROCEDURAL – where the mother had received information and documents from the father in financial proceedings in the Family Court – where the mother had sent that information and those documents to the Child Support Registrar (the Registrar) with her departure application – where it was agreed that that information and those documents attracted the operation of the implied legal obligation on the mother not to send those documents to a third party (the Harman obligation) – where it was agreed the Harman obligation operated to prevent the use of information by a third party who was aware of its provenance – whether the Registrar had breached the Harman obligation – whether the mother had breached the Harman obligation – whether the Registrar had aided and abetted the mother breaching the Harman obligation – whether there was a statutory provision to which the Harman obligation must yield – the interpretation of s 98(1) Child Support (Assessment) Act (CSAA) – the duty of disclosure in a departure application to the Registrar – the obligations under s 159(1) CSAA – where s 98H(1) and s 159(1) CSAA were inconsistent statutory provisions to which the Harman obligation must respectively yield – where neither the Registrar nor the mother were in breach of the Harman obligation – (obiter) whether the Harman obligation applied even if there was no inconsistent statutory provision

    Original Title

    Brief Case Summary: Pedrana & Pedrana (No 2) [2012] (No 2) [2012] FamCA 348 (15 May 2012)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Brief Case Summary: Pedrana & Pedrana (No 2) [2012] FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – PROCEDURAL – where the mother had received information and documents from the father in financial proceedings in the Family Court – where the mother had sent that information and those documents to the Child Support Registrar (the Registrar) with her departure application – where it was agreed that that information and those documents attracted the operation of the implied legal obligation on the mother not to send those documents to a third party (the Harman obligation) – where it was agreed the Harman obligation operated to prevent the use of information by a third party who was aware of its provenance – whether the Registrar had breached the Harman obligation – whether the mother had breached the Harman obligation – whether the Registrar had aided and abetted the mother breaching the Harman obligation – whether there was a statutory provision to which the Harman obligation must yield – the interpretation of s 98(1) Child Support (Assessment) Act (CSAA) – the duty of disclosure in a departure application to the Registrar – the obligations under s 159(1) CSAA – where s 98H(1) and s 159(1) CSAA were inconsistent statutory provisions to which the Harman obligation must respectively yield – where neither the Registrar nor the mother were in breach of the Harman obligation – (obiter) whether the Harman obligation applied even if there was no inconsistent statutory provision

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    221 views2 pages

    Brief Case Summary: Pedrana & Pedrana (No 2) (2012) (No 2) (2012) FamCA 348 (15 May 2012)

    Uploaded by

    Corey Gauci
    Brief Case Summary: Pedrana & Pedrana (No 2) [2012] FAMILY LAW – CHILD SUPPORT – PROCEDURAL – where the mother had received information and documents from the father in financial proceedings in the Family Court – where the mother had sent that information and those documents to the Child Support Registrar (the Registrar) with her departure application – where it was agreed that that information and those documents attracted the operation of the implied legal obligation on the mother not to send those documents to a third party (the Harman obligation) – where it was agreed the Harman obligation operated to prevent the use of information by a third party who was aware of its provenance – whether the Registrar had breached the Harman obligation – whether the mother had breached the Harman obligation – whether the Registrar had aided and abetted the mother breaching the Harman obligation – whether there was a statutory provision to which the Harman obligation must yield – the interpretation of s 98(1) Child Support (Assessment) Act (CSAA) – the duty of disclosure in a departure application to the Registrar – the obligations under s 159(1) CSAA – where s 98H(1) and s 159(1) CSAA were inconsistent statutory provisions to which the Harman obligation must respectively yield – where neither the Registrar nor the mother were in breach of the Harman obligation – (obiter) whether the Harman obligation applied even if there was no inconsistent statutory provision

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    Case Note: Pedrana & Pedrana (No 2) [2012] FamCA 348

    Judge
    Applicant
    Respondent
    Intervener
    Jurisdiction
    Solicitor for the Applicant
    Solicitor for the Respondent
    Counsel for the Respondent
    Counsel for the Intervener
    Solicitor for the Intervener

    Judge Watts, Sydney FamCA


    Ms Pedrana
    Mr Pedrana
    Child Support Registrar
    FamCA
    Greg Walsh & Co
    Family Law Matters
    Mr Othen
    Mr begbie
    Australian Government Solicitor

    FAMILY LAW CHILD SUPPORT PROCEDURAL


    1.

    2.

    Background
    1.1.

    Where the mother had received information and documents from the
    father in financial proceedings in the Family Court.

    1.2.

    Where the mother had sent that information and those documents to the
    Child Support Registrar (the Registrar) with her departure application.

    1.3.

    Where it was agreed that that information and those documents attracted
    the operation of the implied legal obligation on the mother not to send
    those documents to a third party (the Harman obligation).

    1.4.

    Where it was agreed the Harman obligation operated to prevent the use
    of information by a third party who was aware of its provenance.

    Issue(s)
    2.2.

    Whether the Registrar had breached the Harman obligation.

    2.3.

    Whether the mother had breached the Harman obligation.

    2.4.

    Whether the Registrar had aided and abetted the mother breaching the
    Harman obligation.

    2.5.

    Whether there was a statutory provision to which the Harman obligation


    must yield.

    2.6.

    What is the proper interpretation of s 98(1) Child Support (Assessment)


    Act (CSAA)?

    3.

    2.7.

    What is the duty of disclosure in a departure application to the Registrar?

    2.8.

    What are the obligations under s 159(1) CSAA?

    Decision
    3.1.

    Adopting a purposive approach to both s98H (I) and 159 (I) CSAA, Watts
    J found that the Harman obligation must yield to each of those
    subsections respectively.

    3.2.

    Documents and information produced in family law proceedings may be


    used when making an application to the Registrar for a determination to
    depart form an administrative assessment of child support under the
    CSAA.

    3.3.

    Watts J noted in obiter that it could be argued the connection between


    family law and child support proceedings is a sufficient relationship so
    that the Harman obligation does not arise.

    Case link: https://jade.barnet.com.au/Jade.html#article=266712

    You might also like