Barre & Barre; Gilliam & Barre

In the proceedings of *Barre & Barre* and *Gilliam & Barre*, Harper J considered a dispute involving overlapping parties and a creditor seeking a declaration under s90RD of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) that she was in a de facto relationship with the husband. The husband's legal representatives filed a Notice of Ceasing to Act shortly before the hearing, which was limited to the issue of interim property distribution.

The court was required to determine whether procedural fairness had been afforded to the husband, given the last-minute withdrawal of his legal representation, and to make orders for the interim property distribution of funds held in a controlled monies account. The second and third respondents were creditors of the husband in the *Barre & Barre* proceedings.

Harper J found that procedural fairness had been afforded to the husband, despite the circumstances of his legal representation. The court ordered that $25,000 be paid from the controlled monies account to each of the applicant, the first respondent, and the newly named third and fourth respondents (Ms Haynes and Ms Gilliam, respectively). The parties were directed to execute necessary documents to effect these payments. Further orders were made regarding the restraint of dissipation of the remaining funds in the account, the dismissal of the fourth respondent's application, and the adjournment of extant applications. The court also made directions for the service of financial materials and the filing of a financial statement, and granted leave for the first respondent to file further applications. The requirements for the third and fourth respondents' intervention were dispensed with, and costs for a specific period were reserved.