BADER & SPINNER

The parties, Bader and Spinner, were involved in a dispute concerning the division of matrimonial assets. The wife had refused to comply with an order to vacate the former matrimonial home. Crucially, the wife also asserted at trial that the husband had deliberately rendered one of the two major matrimonial assets, a business, valueless. This assertion formed the basis of an application brought by the wife under section 79A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) to set aside final consent orders that had previously settled the dispute. The matter came before His Honour Judge J D Wilson QC.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the final consent orders should be set aside pursuant to section 79A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This required the court to determine if there had been any fraud, duress, or other circumstances that rendered the consent orders unjust. Specifically, the court had to consider the wife's claim that the husband had deliberately devalued the business asset, and whether this conduct, if proven, constituted grounds to invalidate the prior settlement.

His Honour Judge J D Wilson QC found that the circumstances warranted setting aside the final consent orders. The court reasoned that the wife's assertion regarding the husband's deliberate devaluation of the business, if true, would render the consent orders unjust. The court viewed the proceeding as having been regularised by this determination, and accordingly, the trial was refixed to address the substantive issues of asset division in light of this finding.

The court ordered that by 4pm on Thursday, 7 March 2019, the parties were to submit a minute of proposed orders that gave effect to these reasons.