Barnes and Barnes and Anor
Case
•
[2016] FamCA 453
•6 June 2016
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Barnes and Barnes and Anor [2016] FamCA 453
[2016] FamCA 453
6 June 2016
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of *Barnes and Barnes and Anor*, Johns J of the Supreme Court of Victoria considered an application by the applicant for leave to proceed *ex parte* and for an order restraining the husband from dealing with certain documents relating to the valuation of a property. The dispute concerned the potential destruction or concealment of evidence relevant to the valuation of property located at B Street, Suburb C, Victoria.
The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the applicant should be granted leave to proceed *ex parte*, and whether injunctive relief should be granted to prevent the husband from destroying, restricting the availability of, or communicating about documents that evidenced requests for the property's valuation or communications between the husband, Mr Harris, and Mr D of E Pty Ltd concerning that valuation.
Johns J granted the applicant leave to proceed *ex parte*, indicating that the circumstances warranted proceeding without the husband's immediate participation. The Court then made orders restraining the husband from destroying or otherwise restricting the availability of documents related to the valuation of the B Street property. This included any communications concerning the property's value between the husband, Mr Harris, and Mr D of E Pty Ltd, or any requests made to produce statements regarding its value. The applicant was ordered to serve specific documents, including the Court's order and her application, upon the respondents. The matter was listed for a further hearing, and all questions of costs were reserved.
The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the applicant should be granted leave to proceed *ex parte*, and whether injunctive relief should be granted to prevent the husband from destroying, restricting the availability of, or communicating about documents that evidenced requests for the property's valuation or communications between the husband, Mr Harris, and Mr D of E Pty Ltd concerning that valuation.
Johns J granted the applicant leave to proceed *ex parte*, indicating that the circumstances warranted proceeding without the husband's immediate participation. The Court then made orders restraining the husband from destroying or otherwise restricting the availability of documents related to the valuation of the B Street property. This included any communications concerning the property's value between the husband, Mr Harris, and Mr D of E Pty Ltd, or any requests made to produce statements regarding its value. The applicant was ordered to serve specific documents, including the Court's order and her application, upon the respondents. The matter was listed for a further hearing, and all questions of costs were reserved.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
-
Family Law
Legal Concepts
-
Injunction
-
Costs
-
Discovery
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
2
Statutory Material Cited
1
Waugh & Waugh
[2000] FamCA 1183
Mullen & De Bry
[2006] FamCA 1380