High Court rejects special leave: Gomes v Gomes

Justices Gummow and Kiefel of the High Court have rejected the wife’s application for spedical leave to appeal the decision of the Full Court of the Family Court in Gomes v. Gomes. Mushin J had found that there was a distinct lack of credibility of both the wife and the husband.

The wife, who received 65% of the property pool, appealed to the Full Court. Although managing to have some variation of Mushin J’s orders, she was dissatsified and applied to the High Court for special leave to appeal to that court. It is not possible to appeal to the High Court as of right: special leave to appeal is required. It is granted sparingly.

Justices Gummow and Kiefel said that the application for leave to appeal:

fails to identify a question of law that would justify the grant of special
leave. The applicant’s written case is aimed at the treatment of various aspects
of the case by the Full Court and the primary judge, without directing attention
to any specific legal error or a question of principle arising out of the Full
Court’s decision. These complaints are replicated, in substance, in the
applicant’s draft notice of appeal. The applicant does not enjoy sufficient
prospects of success in this Court to warrant a grant of special leave.