Carpani and Arjuna

This matter concerned an application by the Applicant, Ms Carpani, against the Respondent, Mr Arjuna, in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The dispute involved an application for interim orders to restrain the Respondent from dealing with various assets. The Court granted leave for the application to be heard on an urgent and ex parte basis.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to grant interim injunctive relief under section 114(1)(e) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) to preserve assets pending further orders. Specifically, the Court was required to determine if the Applicant had established a sufficient case to warrant restraining the Respondent from withdrawing, transferring, or otherwise dealing with monies in various bank accounts, superannuation funds, and from disposing of or encumbering his interest in a motor vehicle and several properties located in India.

McClelland J applied the principles governing the grant of interlocutory injunctions, requiring the Applicant to demonstrate a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience favoured the granting of the orders. The Court's reasoning focused on the need to preserve the marital asset pool to ensure that any final property settlement orders could be effectively enforced. The orders made reflect the Court's assessment that such preservation was necessary, restraining the Respondent from dealing with specified bank accounts, superannuation funds, a motor vehicle, and properties in India. The Court also made consequential orders for service of the injunctions on the Respondent and relevant financial institutions, and reserved the question of costs.