Baghti and Baghti (No. 2)

In the matter of *Baghti and Baghti (No. 2)*, Justice Fowler of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia made orders concerning a business known as "D Business". The proceedings involved an application by the husband (the applicant) against the wife and a second respondent. The core of the dispute revolved around the wife's alleged conduct in relation to the business, which the applicant sought to protect pending further orders.

The court was required to determine whether to grant injunctive relief to preserve the status quo of the business and to facilitate an independent investigation into its operations. Specifically, the court considered the necessity of restraining the wife and the second respondent from dealing with the business assets and from conducting its affairs in a manner that could prejudice the applicant's interests. The court also had to consider the terms of any orders designed to allow for a thorough examination of the business's trading activities and stock.

Justice Fowler reasoned that interim injunctive relief was warranted to prevent the dissipation or improper disposal of the business's assets and to ensure its continued operation in the ordinary course. The court ordered that the wife and the second respondent be restrained from selling, transferring, encumbering, or otherwise alienating the business or its assets, except in the usual course of trade. Furthermore, the court mandated specific measures to allow an appointed agent, Mr K, unfettered access to the business premises for a seven-day observation period. These measures included the installation of a cash register for recording sales, a thorough stock-take at the beginning and end of the observation period, inspection of stock deliveries, and the recording of any disposed stock. The court also stipulated that a solicitor, or a qualified substitute, must be present throughout the observation period to act as an officer of the court.

The court ordered that the wife and the second respondent be restrained by injunction from selling, transferring, assigning, encumbering, or alienating the business or its assets other than in the ordinary course of business. They were also restrained from removing stock, plant, equipment, or monies from the premises other than in the ordinary course of business, and from doing anything to cause the business to trade otherwise than in the ordinary course. The court further ordered that the wife and the second respondent must permit Mr K and his staff full access to the business premises for seven trading days to observe operations, conduct stock-takes, and record stock movements. A solicitor or a substitute solicitor of at least five years' standing, with no connection to the applicant, was required to be present throughout this observation period, having filed an undertaking with the court. Liberty to apply to discharge, vary, or modify these orders was granted on 24 hours' notice. The NSW Police Service was requested to provide assistance in ensuring compliance with the orders. The costs of the application and the implementation of these orders were reserved.