Victoria & Nathaniel [2025] FedCFamC1F 864 (27 November 2025)

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court's records.

Note: This copy of the Court's Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Victoria & Nathaniel has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

1. Ms Victoria ("the applicant") and Mr Nathaniel ("the respondent") married in 2002 and separated in 2008. An Order for Divorce was made in late 2009.
2. On the applicant's case, she and the respondent recommenced cohabitation in 2009 or early 2010 and effected a further separation in January 2025.
3. On 2 April 2025, the applicant filed an Initiating Application in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) seeking the adjustment of property between she and the respondent.
4. They have three children, Mr B Nathaniel born in 2004 ("the second respondent"), Ms C Nathaniel born in 2005 ("the third respondent"), and Ms F born in 2014.
5. The respondent became bankrupt on the making of a sequestration order in the Federal Court of Australia on 22 July 2025. The fifth respondent, being the respondent's trustee in bankruptcy was joined to the proceedings on 29 August 2025. The proceedings were transferred on that day to this Court.
6. Two items of property subject to the relief sought by the applicant were:

(a) Property 1 at G Street Suburb H, registered in the name of the now adult child of the parties, Ms C Nathaniel, the third respondent.

(b) Property 2 at G Street Suburb H, registered in the name of the parties' adult son, Mr B Nathaniel, the second respondent.

1. The joinder of the adult children of the parties by the applicant on her filing her Initiating Application, by naming as the respective second and third respondents to the application, was necessary for the purposes of r 3.01 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) ("the Rules") in circumstances where the applicant contended that each of the adult children of the parties held their respective Suburb H real property interests beneficially for she and the respondent.
2. Rule 3.01 of the Rules records as follows:

3.01 Necessary parties

A person whose rights may be directly affected by an issue in a proceeding, and whose participation as a party is necessary for the court to determine all issues in dispute in the proceeding, must be included as a party to the proceeding.

1. Pursuant to consent orders made by a senior judicial registrar on 29 September 2025, each of the properties at Property 1 and 2 at G Street, Suburb H were to be sold. The proceeds of sale were directed to be applied to the payment of selling costs and thereafter in discharge of secured liabilities upon each of the properties. The sale of each of the properties completed in November 2025. All the proceeds of each sale were applied to secured liabilities, such that no proceeds of sale remained.
2. Each of the adult children of the parties, being the second respondent and the third respondent, appeared at the listing today. The respondent did not appear when the matter was called in circumstances where he has conveyed to the Court that he is delayed by way of air travel from Brisbane to Sydney.
3. The Court has identified that, in the circumstances of the disposal of each of the G Street Suburb H properties, the necessity of each of the adult children of the parties continuing to remain as parties to the proceeding is otiose.
4. It is self-evident that their participation is not required to determine all the issues remaining in dispute in the proceedings, nor is it apparent that any of their rights will prospectively be directly affected by an issue in the proceedings.
5. Rule 3.05 of the Rules provides that a party may apply to be removed from the proceeding by filing an Application in a Proceeding supported by an affidavit.
6. In circumstances where each of the second respondent and the third respondent are either a student or engaged in working holidays in the United States and do not have the benefit of legal representatives, the Court can, pursuant to r 1.31 of the Rules dispense with any rules in the interests of justice and to otherwise implement the overarching purpose of the Rules as identified in r 1.04 of the Rules so as to facilitate the just resolution of disputes according to law as quickly, inexpensively and efficiently as possible.
7. In these circumstances, the Court on its own motion will make orders removing each of Mr B Nathaniel, born in 2004 and Ms C Nathaniel, born in 2005 as parties to the proceedings.
8. In the event either Mr B Nathaniel, or Ms C Nathaniel in the future determine that they wish to be added as a party to the proceedings, they can make an application as they are advised to again be added as a party pursuant to r 3.03 of the Rules.
9. For all of the above reasons, I make the following orders.

I certify that the preceding fourteen (17) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Ex Tempore Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Campton.

MR HOBBES, THE TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY OF THE ESTATE OF MR NATHANIEL