Boston and Boston

[2017] FamCA 75

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BOSTON & BOSTON [2017] FamCA 75

FAMILY LAW – STAY APPLICATION – Where the wife seeks the stay of final property settlement orders – Where the final orders require the imminent sale of the former matrimonial home – Where no special circumstances exist justifying departure from the ordinary rule that the husband should be entitled to the fruits of the litigation – Concluded the law does not envisage that orders under appeal will be stayed simply because they are due to be implemented before the appeal is determined – Ordered the wife’s application is dismissed

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

Aldridge v Keaton (Stay Appeal) [2009] FamCAFC 106
Australian Coal and Shale Employees’ Federation v The Commonwealth (1956) 94 CLR 621
Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Myer Emporium Ltd (No.1) (1986) 160 CLR 220
Jennings Constructions Ltd v Burgundy Royale Investments Pty Ltd (No.1) (1986) 161 CLR 681
JRN & IEG (1998) 72 ALJR 1329
Sheldon & Weir (Stay Application) [2011] FamCAFC 5
Trahn & Long (No.2) [2008] FamCAFC 194

APPLICANT: Ms Boston

RESPONDENT: Mr Boston

FILE NUMBER: ADC 1946 of 2012

DATE DELIVERED: 7 February 2017

PLACE DELIVERED: Newcastle

PLACE HEARD: Newcastle

JUDGMENT OF: Austin J

HEARING DATE: 7 February 2017

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: In person

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: In person

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: In person

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: In person

Orders

1. The Application in a Case filed on 12 January 2017 is dismissed.

2. No order as to costs.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Boston & Boston has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT NEWCASTLE

FILE NUMBER: ADC 1946 of 2012

Ms Boston

Applicant

And

Mr Boston

Respondent

EX-TEMPORE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The application before the Court for determination today is an Application in a Case, filed by the wife on 12 January 2017, seeking to stay the operation of property settlement orders made by Justice Dawe on 12 December 2016 following the conclusion of very lengthy litigation between the applicant wife and respondent husband adjudicating their rights under Part VIII of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

2. The orders and reasons delivered by Justice Dawe on 12 December 2016 represented the culmination of five years’ litigation between the parties. The hearing extended over 19 days between early October and early November 2016.  In essence, her Honour concluded the parties had net assets of just under $800,000 and decided they were entitled to an equal share of those assets.