Bode and Coyne and Anor

The parties to this matter before the Family Court of Australia at Adelaide were Mr Bode (the applicant husband), Ms Coyne (the respondent wife), and Mrs Coyne (the third party, who is the wife's mother and third mortgagee). The dispute concerned the husband's application for a review of orders made by a Judicial Registrar on 13 December 2006. These prior orders had refused the husband's application to sell a property known as Lot C, which would have necessitated granting a right of way over an adjacent property, Lot A.

The court was required to determine whether the wife and third party had established grounds to object to the husband's application for the sale of Lot C. Specifically, their opposition was based on two arguments: first, that selling Lots A and C together, along with two other allotments (Lots D and E), as a bundle would achieve greater sales potential than the husband's proposed sale; and second, that improvements on Lot C were incomplete, and their completion would result in a better sale price.

The court found that the valuation evidence provided by Mr S, a licensed valuer, did not support the argument that selling Lots A and C together would yield a significantly greater value than selling them individually. While Mr S indicated a combined value only marginally higher than the sum of their individual valuations, his detailed assessment did not substantiate the claim of enhanced value from a joint sale. Furthermore, the court noted a lack of evidence to support the assertion that completing improvements on Lot C would increase its value, as the wife had not yet obtained the necessary expert opinion from Mr S on this point. Consequently, the court found no basis for the wife to sustain her objection on the grounds presented.