BALDWIN & BALDWIN

[2015] FCCA 3113

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BALDWIN & BALDWIN [2015] FCCA 3113

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Application for spousal maintenance – application arises at interim stage – parties’ competing applications for settlement of property fixed for May 2016 – high conflict – nature of interim hearing – meaning of adequately – reasonableness in all the circumstances – what is proper – considerations of justice and equity.

Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975, ss.72; 74; 75(2); 75(3)

See C & C (1996) FLC 92-651
Bevan & Bevan (1995) FLC 92-600
Redman v Redman (1987) FLC 91-805

Applicant: MR BALDWIN

Respondent: MS BALDWIN

File Number: ADC 4086 of 2013

Judgment of: Judge Brown

Hearing date: 3 November 2015

Date of Last Submission: 3 November 2015

Delivered at: Adelaide

Delivered on: 23 November 2015

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: In person

Solicitors for the Applicant: Not Applicable

Counsel for the Respondent: Ms Lewis

Solicitors for the Respondent: Angela Ferdinandy

ORDERS

1. The husband’s application for interim spousal maintenance filed on 15 June 2015 is dismissed.

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

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT ADELAIDE

ADC 4086 of 2013

MR BALDWIN

Applicant

And

MS BALDWIN

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. These reasons for judgment relate to an interim application for spousal maintenance.  The applicant for spousal maintenance is Mr Baldwin “the husband”.  He seeks the sum of $500.00 per week, from the respondent, Ms Baldwin “the wife”. 

Background

1. The parties married on (omitted) 2002.  They finally separated in May of 2013.  They are the parents of two children – X born (omitted) 2004 and Y born (omitted) 2005.  A final parenting order was made on 13 November 2013, which resulted in a week about shared care arrangement for X and Y. 

2. The wife commenced the current round of proceedings on 2 April 2015.  She seeks orders which would result in the settlement of matrimonial property proceedings between the parties.  The effect of the orders, which she seeks on a final basis, can be summarised as follows:

   ·The husband transfer to her all his interest in a business entitled (business omitted) “the business”.  This is an (business omitted), which primarily provides (business omitted);

   ·The husband transfer to her three real properties, located at Property S, “the Property S property”; Property B, “the Property B” property; and Property H “the Property H property”.  The Property H property has now been sold and moneys realised from its sale paid into credit facilities relating to the business.  This is controversial;

   ·The husband retain a Porsche motor vehicle and the loan relating to it, together with two go-carts.  The husband retain his superannuation and liability to pay credit card debts in his name;

   ·The husband pay to the wife the sum of $70,000.00; 

   ·Otherwise each party retain other chattels and financial resources standing in their respective names.

3. The husband responded to this application on 15 June 2015.…