THE FAMILY LAW PRACTICE MANUAL:
© Peter Szabo 2022 PREFACE
Changes to this chapter due to FCFCOA Rules

Having practised in Family Law since 1976 I can claim to have “seen it all”. Well, almost. I started Articles in Echuca on 7 March 1976, 2 months after the Family Law Act came into effect. I wanted to do Tax. Three hours into Articles I was asked to see a new client for a divorce. My Principal had no idea. Nor did I, but I got through the interview and ended up getting a Divorce for him. I recall
going to Bendigo with Counsel for a hearing in the Supreme Court. My client turned up hand in hand with his wife. By the end of the week, I had seen 7 Family Law clients. A good start. I fled Echuca, having served one year, 2 days 3 hours and 10 seconds of Articles. I took up a position at Phillips Fox and Masel (now international Firm DLA Piper). My Principal Michael Salter
was going through his own divorce. He handballed the Family Law Practice to me. The rest is history. I wanted to do Tax. In 1978 I commenced the first of 43 continuous years as a Family Law Instructor at the Leo Cussen Centre for Law.

In 1985 I published the first edition of the Family Court Practice Manual. I wrote it with the intention of it becoming part of the course material. That way, my precedents couldn’t be replaced by the Mentors. The Manual, renamed The Family Law Practice Manual when the Federal Magistrates Court was established in December 1999, remains as reference material for the Family
Law course.

Over the years I have published 5 editions to incorporate the changes along the way. The 6 thedition is the first Internet Publication. I guess this re-write comes in as the 7 th Edition.

The Court has come full circle. At the start, the Family Court was properly resourced. Then thecutbacks came. Counselling and Conciliation Conferences were outsourced, Judicial appointmentswere cut back.  And so it went. We now have the counsellors returning, and access to moreRegistrars at the First Court Event. Importantly, their powers have also been greatly increased. I
predict that this resourcing will make the biggest difference in getting cases dealt with. Added to this is the ability to use video conferencing, and files are now digital.

Pre-action procedures which were mandatory only for parenting cases have now been made mandatory for all proceedings, with few exceptions. Complying with these procedures has increased legal costs very significantly. Not many clients want to go to court. Family Lawyers do not rush to Court. To have to sign a Certificate of Best endevours is quite frankly, insulting. The minority of clients who are a problem will remain a problem. In some respects, I am disappointed at the Big Brother approach adopted. Again, good lawyers kept their clients informed on costs, and acted responsibly in the conduct of their files.

1. 2

The Rules mandate the provision of a very large number of pamphlets and brochures to our clients. It is in my view overwhelming. Thankfully, it is all in digital format. I email them and provide a summary of what is relevant to their case.
In 1996, I published the booklet ”Tax Issues in Family Law Property Settlements – the Difference
between Hacking and Carving”. I am doing Tax.
Peter Szabo