Bing and Bing

In the matter of *Bing and Bing*, heard in the Family Court of Australia at Melbourne, Justice Mushin considered competing applications by the wife for interim spousal maintenance and moneys on account of litigation costs, against the backdrop of significant disputes regarding the parties' respective financial positions in proceedings for the alteration of property interests. The wife sought $30,000 for urgent spousal maintenance and $200,000 as security for her costs.

The court was required to determine whether to grant the wife's applications for interim spousal maintenance and security for costs, given the substantial disparity in the parties' alleged asset positions and the inability to definitively resolve these contentious issues on an interim basis without the benefit of cross-examination. The central factual dispute revolved around the husband's financial standing, with the wife alleging significant profitability and the husband contending he was technically insolvent.

Justice Mushin reasoned that the husband's own affidavit, which stated a net asset position of $8.4 million, was sufficient in the circumstances to justify making interim orders. The court found it unreasonable to expect the wife to encumber the former matrimonial home to fund her legal costs, particularly given the husband's substantial net asset position. Accordingly, the court ordered the husband to pay $230,000 within 14 days, comprising $200,000 as security for costs and $30,000 for urgent spousal maintenance, with liberty reserved to argue the ultimate disposition of these moneys at the final trial. The court also ordered the wife to deliver specific chattels to the husband within seven days and dismissed all other interim applications, reserving all questions of costs.