FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

PIETERS & PIETERS	[2015] FamCA 1134	

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Request to attend by electronic communication  at a first day of hearing –application opposed by the wife – where the husband and his solicitor are located inter-state – interim orders made refusing the request to attend by electronic communication 	

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)	

APPLICANT:	Mr Pieters	

RESPONDENT:	Ms Pieters	

FILE NUMBER:	MLC	5067		of	2013	

DATE DELIVERED:	18 November 2015	

PLACE DELIVERED:	Melbourne	

PLACE HEARD:	Melbourne	

JUDGMENT OF:	Johns J	

HEARING DATE:	18 November 2015	

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT:	Mr Atkinson	

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT:	Vadarlis & Associates	

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT:	Ms Ferguson	

SOLICiTOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:	GJ Legal Solicitors	

		

Orders
(1)	That the husband’s Request to Attend by Electronic Communication filed on 28 October 2015 be dismissed.
(2)	That the husband be excused from attending in person at the first day of hearing on 30 November 2015 on the basis that he will be available to his legal representative by telephone.
(3)	That the wife’s costs of this day be reserved.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Pieters & Pieters has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
Family Court of Australia at MELBOURNE	

FILE NUMBER: MLC 5067 of 2013

Mr Pieters	
Applicant

And

Ms Pieters	
Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
1.	I am going to refuse the husband’s application for permission to appear electronically at the first day hearing listed before me on 30 November 2015.  I note the submissions made on behalf of the husband by his solicitor that it is the husband’s strong preference that he be represented by that solicitor at the first day of hearing.  It is submitted that the costs in such representation are significant, and it is on that basis that it is put that electronic communication should be permitted.  
2.	The first day of hearing is an important day.  It is a day where the parties have the opportunity to inform the Court as to the issues that are at play in respect of their competing applications. 
3.	It is also an opportunity for them to ventilate any interim issues which may stand in the way of the matter progressing to a final hearing.  Given the importance of the day, I am of the view that there should be an appearance personally on behalf of the husband at that hearing.  The first day of hearing provides counsel for the parties with the opportunity to have discussions to promote resolution and narrowing of issues and, in some instances, even settlement.  It is open for the husband to brief counsel to appear on his behalf should he wish to minimise the costs of an appearance.  
4.	Alternatively, it is open for him to fund his solicitor appearing on his behalf at the hearing.  I am not going to require the husband to personally attend the hearing.  I will require that he be available by telephone for the duration of the hearing so that he is able to provide instructions either to his solicitor, if he is to appear, or alternatively, if counsel is to be briefed on his behalf.  Therefore, I will dismiss the application that is filed on behalf of the husband on 28 October 2015.  I will reserve costs.  
I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Johns delivered on 18 November 2015.

Associate:  

Date:  18 November 2015