CASTELLANOS & MINAS

[2011] FamCA 999

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

CASTELLANOS & MINAS [2011] FamCA 999

FAMILY LAW – Property settlement - consent orders approved

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Mr Castellanos

RESPONDENT: Ms Minas

FILE NUMBER: MLC 7416 of 2008

DATE DELIVERED: 18/11/2011

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Cronin J

HEARING DATE: 04/10/2011

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Schetzer

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Schetzer Constantinou

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Ms K. Robinson

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Carew Counsel Pty Ltd

Orders

1. That BY CONSENT there be orders in accordance with the minutes of proposed orders marked Exhibit “A” sealed and attached hereto AND IT IS DIRECTED that such minutes remain upon the Court file.

2. That the solicitor for the wife engross the minutes and deliver them by electronic transmission to my Associate within 7 days.

3. That there be a transcript of the reasons this day which should be placed on the file and be released to the parties

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MLEBOURNE

FILE NUMBER:  MLC 416 of 2008

Mr Castellanos

Applicant

And

Ms Minas

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. In property proceedings, the court is obliged to follow the provisions of section 79 of the Act.  Section 79(2), provides:

   The court shall not make an order unless it is satisfied that it is just and equitable to do so.

2. The subjective judgment by the court is guided by the parties approach to the settlement. 

3. This is a settlement which is within the range of probable outcomes having regard to the respective financial contributions and contributions of a non-financial nature.  There is a slight adjustment in favour of the husband because of an inheritance received by the wife subsequent to separation, which no doubt affects her financial position favourably.

4. It is quite clear the parties have accepted this as a commercial transaction.  They are both intelligent people, they have both had significant assistance from lawyers and I understand that the matter has been mediated with the assistance of a former judge of this court.  It is a sensible solution and a sensible solution is often a just and equitable one.  I am satisfied in those circumstances that it is appropriate to make the orders under section 79 as just and equitable.

I certify that the preceding four (4) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Cronin

Associate: 

Date:  15 December 2011