Brangus and Brangus (No 2)

The matter of *Brangus and Brangus (No 2)* concerned an application by the husband, which was dismissed by Justice Cohen of the Family Court of Australia. The dispute arose in the context of prior orders made by the Court on 5 February 2010, concerning the division of property. The husband had appealed these earlier orders.

The primary legal issue before the Court was the enforcement of the 5 February 2010 orders, particularly in light of the husband's failure or refusal to execute necessary documents to give effect to those orders, and the pendency of his appeal. The Court was required to determine whether it had the power to appoint a third party to execute documents on the husband's behalf and to grant leave for the wife to seek such an appointment.

Justice Cohen applied Section 106A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), which empowers the Court to appoint a person to execute a deed, document, or instrument in the name of a party and to do all things necessary to give validity and operation to court orders, where a party fails to do so. The Court reasoned that this provision was designed to ensure that orders of the Court are not rendered nugatory by a party's non-compliance. The Court also granted leave to the wife to approach a Registrar for the appointment of the Registrar to execute the documents if the husband failed to do so within 14 days.

The Court ordered that the husband's application be dismissed. It further ordered that the Registrar of the Court be appointed to execute any necessary documents in the husband's name if he failed to do so within 14 days of the current orders, and granted the wife leave to seek this appointment. Notations indicated that the wife was in a position to have the documents executed immediately and had undertaken not to dispose of her interest in the former matrimonial home pending the determination of the husband's appeal.