Brie & Brie

In the matter of *Brie & Brie*, Mr Brie (the husband) sought an extension of time to comply with final property consent orders made in October 2019, which required him to make substantial payments to Ms Brie (the wife). The wife asserted that the husband was in default of these orders, owing a significant sum. The husband's application sought to vary the payment dates and stay the default provisions, including the appointment of a trustee for sale to liquidate his assets.

The court was required to determine whether to grant the husband an extension of time to comply with the consent orders, and consequently, whether to stay the enforcement provisions of those orders. This involved considering the husband's application for variation under section 79A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) and the court's discretion in such matters.

Baumann J dismissed the husband's application, finding that he had not established grounds for variation under section 79A. The court held that it was not impracticable for the husband to comply with the orders, distinguishing "impracticable" from "impossible" and characterising the husband's financial difficulties as a "vicissitude of commercial life." The court also noted that the husband could not rely on his own default to seek relief under section 79A(1)(c). The court further ordered the substitution of Mr R as Trustee for Sale in place of Mr C, and set out detailed provisions for the Trustee's remuneration, expenses, and the husband's disclosure obligations to the Trustee.