NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Burman v Zillman [2017] NSWSC 229 Hearing dates: 8 March 2017 Date of orders: 08 March 2017 Decision date: 08 March 2017 Jurisdiction: Equity Before: Darke J Decision: Proceedings transferred to the Family Court of Australia. Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – transfer of proceedings – application to transfer proceedings to Family Court of Australia – cross-vesting legislation – whether more appropriate for Family Court to determine proceedings – whether Family Court would have accrued jurisdiction to determine the claims made in the proceedings – whether the interests of justice served by transfer– proceedings transferred Legislation Cited: Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW) Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss 31, 79 Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (Cth), s 5 Cases Cited: Valceski v Valceski (2007) 70 NSWLR 36 Vaughan v Frost [2010] NSWSC 492 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Brian Carey Burman (First Plaintiff) Isdell Katherine Burman (Second Plaintiff) Matthew Lange Zillman (First Defendant) Emma Carey Zillman (Second Defendant) Homepath Pty Ltd (Third Defendant) Representation: Counsel: F C Corsaro SC with M Auld (Plaintiff/Respondents) D Neggo (First Defendant/Applicant)
Solicitors: Chambers Russell Lawyers (Plaintiffs) Watson Mangioni Lawyers (First Defendant) File Number(s): 2016/289586 Publication restriction: None
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate