CALDER & POCA

In the matter of *Calder & Poca*, Johnston J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications concerning property sale proceeds, interim spousal maintenance, and costs. The dispute involved the sale of a property located at N Road, N, and the distribution of its proceeds, as well as the wife's claim for interim spousal maintenance and the allocation of legal costs incurred during interlocutory proceedings.

The court was required to determine the terms of interim consent orders for the sale of the N Road property, including the minimum sale price and the priority of distribution of the proceeds. Additionally, the court had to assess whether the wife had met the threshold for interim spousal maintenance, considering the parties' ongoing costs of maintaining their respective lifestyles, and whether it was reasonable to order the husband to pay the amount sought by the wife. Finally, the court addressed the issue of costs, specifically in light of considerable interlocutory litigation, and whether to order the husband to pay an equivalent sum to the wife's solicitors as he paid to his own legal representatives.

Johnston J made orders reflecting a handwritten Minute of Orders. These orders mandated the husband to facilitate the sale of the N Road property within six weeks at a price not less than $670,000, or as advised by the selling agent. Upon settlement, proceeds were to be applied first to sale costs, then to discharge the NAB mortgage (allowing for any shortfall from a term deposit), followed by a payment of $30,000 to the wife on account of legal expenses, with the balance to the husband. The categorisation of payments under the latter two heads was reserved for the trial judge. The husband was also ordered to pay the wife's solicitors an equivalent sum to that paid to his own solicitors for the further conduct of proceedings, with his solicitors to notify the wife's solicitors of any payments received from the husband. Pending further order, the husband was to pay the wife $750 per week. The substantive property proceedings were listed for hearing, and parties were ordered to share the setting-down and hearing fees equally.