Begbie & Narang

In *Begbie & Narang*, heard by Hartnett J, the Applicant husband sought the enforcement of final property orders, while the Respondent wife applied to set aside those orders, in part or entirely, pursuant to s 79A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The wife contended the orders were made under duress and sought a reconsideration of their justice and equity, proposing substituted property orders. The wife also sought review of spousal maintenance. Separately, the wife sought to vary final parenting orders concerning changeover arrangements, which had been made by consent.

The court was required to determine whether the wife had established grounds to set aside the final property orders under s 79A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), specifically considering allegations of duress and a subsequent reconsideration of the justice and equity of the consent orders. Additionally, the court needed to address the wife's application for spousal maintenance and the variation of parenting orders.

Hartnett J considered the wife's evidence regarding her financial circumstances and her alleged pressure during the consent order negotiations. The court noted that both parties were represented by experienced legal professionals and that negotiations occurred remotely due to COVID-19. The wife's claim of duress was weighed against the fact that she had accepted a significant portion of the settlement sum and had withdrawn funds from her superannuation prior to signing the consent orders. The court also observed that the wife had sought a substantially higher sum in her amended response before ultimately compromising. The court ultimately ordered the wife to sign documents to transfer the property within seven days, failing which a Registrar was appointed to execute the documents. The wife was also ordered to pay $2,000 towards the husband's costs, with a stay of payment for 24 months.