BONNETT & BONNETT

In the matter of *Bonnett & Bonnett*, Ms Bonnett (the wife) made an interim application for the sale of matrimonial property, which was opposed by Mr Bonnett (the husband) who resided in the property and proposed to retain it on a final basis. The husband also applied for the dismissal of the wife's interim child support departure orders. The proceedings were heard by Cleary J.

The court was required to determine whether to order the sale of the matrimonial property on an interim basis, considering the husband's opposition and proposal to retain the property finally. Additionally, the court had to consider the husband's application to dismiss the wife's interim child support departure orders, particularly in light of his period of unemployment and subsequent re-employment, and his financial disclosure. Finally, the court was asked to determine the appropriate orders for costs.

Regarding the property sale, Cleary J found that an interim sale would be punitive and potentially irremediable, leading to the dismissal of the wife's application. On the child support issue, the court noted that while the husband had been unemployed and unable to meet payments, he had since regained employment and capacity. The court also observed that the husband had not made full financial disclosure. Contributions during the period of unemployment could be considered at trial, and the husband's application to dismiss the departure orders was also dismissed.

As both parties were unsuccessful in their respective applications, the general principle that each party bear their own costs was applied, and the applications for costs were dismissed. Consequently, no order was made as to costs.