BOOTH & BOOTH

In the matter of *Booth & Booth*, Johns J considered an application by the wife for the enforcement of final property orders. The husband opposed the immediate sale of a property, citing alleged contamination. However, the court noted that the issue of contamination had already been addressed in the final orders, and the husband had failed to provide any evidence of new contamination. The court found that the husband's communications following the final orders demonstrated an intention to frustrate their operation, and that the wife was entitled to the benefits of the judgment.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to enforce the final property orders, specifically concerning the sale of a property, notwithstanding the husband's objections. The court also considered the wife's application for costs.

Johns J reasoned that the husband's opposition to the sale was without merit, as the issue of property contamination had been dealt with in the final orders and no new evidence had been presented. The court found that the husband's conduct was designed to thwart the enforcement of the orders. Consequently, the court ordered the sale of the property, appointing the wife as trustee for the husband for the sale. The husband was also ordered to contribute to the costs of appointing professionals to facilitate the sale, with provisions made for the wife to make these appointments if the husband failed to comply. The husband was further restrained from interfering with the sale process. The court also ordered the husband to pay the wife's costs of the application.