Anterres and Dinunzo

[2008] FamCA 357

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

ANTERRES & DINUNZO [2008] FamCA 357

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Consent Orders

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Anterres

RESPONDENT: Mr Dinunzo

FILE NUMBER: CAC 1133 of 2007

DATE DELIVERED: 25 March 2008

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Cronin J

HEARING DATE: 25 March 2008

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr P. Davis

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Middletons

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr M. Bartfeld QC, with Mr G. Berkovich

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: WMB Lawyers

ORDERS

1. That BY CONSENT there be orders in accordance with the minutes of proposed orders marked Exhibit “A” sealed and attached hereto AND IT IS DIRECTED that such minutes remain upon the Court file.

2. That the solicitor for the wife engross the minutes and deliver them by electronic transmission to my Associate within 7 days.

3. That the material produced under subpoena be returned forthwith to the recipient of the subpoena.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Anterres & Dinunzo is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER:  CAC 1133 of 2007

MS ANTERRES

Applicant

And

MR DINUNZO

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is a matter that came today into the duty list for the purposes of an argument about some interim matters including injunctions and, ironically enough, discovery.  The parties, through the great assistance they have received from their lawyers, have ultimately come to me at the end of the day with final orders.  I have had the advantage of reading the totality of the file, including reading behind the lines in respect of some of the financial matters.  What has been explained to me is that the parties own a number of properties and that ultimately, with their good graces, they have worked out that an equal division of the pool which is a very sensible and commercial outcome.

2. The husband is 45 years of age, a medical practitioner whose income is secure.  The wife is aged 40 and in secure employment with the Commonwealth Public Service.  She is about to go overseas.  In that sense there are few differences between the parties in respect of the future and there are no children of the relationship.  The parties have agreed that there is a modest argument about contributions and that is something that was obvious from looking at the various documents they had filed. 

3. My task is to make an order in circumstances where it is just and equitable to do so, and having read what I have read and heard what I have, I am more than satisfied that this is a just and equitable outcome between the parties.  It is a case in which not only are the parties to be congratulated in saving themselves a substantial amount of money but also angst in determining the matter in the way they have today.  But it is also one of those cases where the court and the parties benefited enormously from the input of the lawyers whose work I respect. 

4. In this case, therefore, I would like to congratulate everybody and I make orders in terms of the minutes which I will mark as exhibit A.  I will direct that the minute remain on the court file and I will ask that the applicant provide to my associate a typed copy of the minute within a week.

I certify that the preceding Four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Cronin

Associate: 

Date:  7 May 2008