CHEETHAM & CHEETHAM

In the matter of *Cheetham & Cheetham*, Hartnett J considered an application by the husband concerning the wife's failure to comply with previous court orders. The dispute centred on the wife's default in her obligations regarding the former matrimonial home, including refinancing a mortgage and a line of credit, and the husband's claim for penalty interest and costs.

The court was required to determine whether the wife should pay penalty interest on a sum due to the husband, whether there were justifying circumstances for the wife to pay the husband's costs on an indemnity basis, and what orders should be made in light of the wife's ongoing non-compliance, including the potential sale of the former matrimonial home.

Hartnett J reasoned that the wife's failure to comply with the orders warranted the imposition of penalty interest as prescribed by the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The court also found that the wife's conduct justified ordering her to pay the husband's costs on an indemnity basis, reflecting the significant burden and expense caused by her non-compliance. In default of the wife's immediate compliance with specific obligations, including refinancing the mortgage and line of credit and transferring her interest in the property, the court ordered the sale of the real property. The husband was granted conduct of the sale, with detailed provisions for the appointment of a selling agent and conveyancer, and the wife was ordered to cooperate with the sale process.

The court ordered that within seven days, the wife was to pay penalty interest of $11,331.37, fulfil her obligations to refinance the mortgage and line of credit, and pay the husband's costs of $31,946.17 on an indemnity basis. In default of these actions, the former matrimonial home was to be sold, with the proceeds distributed in a specified order, including payment of outstanding sums to the husband and any remaining balance to the wife. The husband was restrained from accessing the property.