Cook and Cook (No 3)

[2010] FamCA 773

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

COOK & COOK (NO. 3) [2010] FamCA 773

FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTIONS – Extension of interim injunction

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: MS COOK

RESPONDENT: MR COOK

FILE NUMBER: MLF 1997 of 2003

DATE DELIVERED: 30 AUGUST 2010

PLACE DELIVERED: MELBOURNE

PLACE HEARD: MELBOURNE

JUDGMENT OF: YOUNG J

HEARING DATE: 30 AUGUST 2010

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: MR R.J. SPICER

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Kennedy Wisewoulds

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr J.W. St John SC

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Marshalls & Dent

Orders

IT IS ORDERED:

1. THAT the interim injunction pronounced in paragraph 3 of the Orders of 10 August 2010 be extended until further order.

2. THAT liberty is specifically reserved to either of the parties to apply to the court to vary, modify or discharge those interim injunctions upon proper material filed and served.

3. THAT the extempore reasons for judgment be transcribed, be placed upon the Court file and be made available to the parties.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Cook & Cook is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: MLF 1997 of 2003

MS COOK

Applicant

And

MR COOK

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. In the continuing matter of Cook, when the matter was last before me on 10 August I pronounced in paragraph 3 of the orders of that day certain injunctions which restrained the husband by himself, his servants or agents from disposing of, transferring, encumbering or in any way diminishing his assets and including:

   (a)       any shareholding held in his name or on his behalf;

   (b)any interest or entitlement in the estate of his late mother or father;

   (c)his joint registered proprietorship of H Street;

   without first obtaining the written consent of the wife or court order, and noting that the orders do not restrict any expenditure of money upon his usual or reasonable living expenses, or compliance with extant Family Court orders for costs or spousal maintenance.

2. I am asked today to extend that injunction on behalf of the wife.  Mr Spicer as Counsel for the husband has indicated that he would not oppose any extension for a reasonable period of that injunctive order, but highlighted that there is no necessity for same and that his client should not be so restrained by this ongoing injunction. 

3. In submissions today Mr St John SC had available to him documents that were subpoenaed to court this morning.  I have earlier made available to both solicitors, for inspection and copying, all of the subpoenaed documents which included substantial documents from Y Investments Pty Ltd.  From those documents two particular letters have been produced and these have been marked exhibits “W1” and “W2” in this interim hearing.  The first is a letter dated 4 February 2009 providing exclusivity to a firm based overseas to continue negotiations for an equity position in the company.  The second document is an email which related to questions of and pertaining to the value of shareholding in the company and where the husband has, at the least, passed on an email received to the then chairman of that company.  I carefully make no further comment upon the exhibits or draw any conclusions therefrom.

4. I record that Mr Spicer on behalf of the husband has risen to his feet to explain certain matters of and related to each of those exhibits, but more particularly has said that in the fullness of time the husband can give a detailed and full explanation for both the contents of the documents and the circumstances surrounding their production or transmission.  Again, because of the necessity of time and bearing in mind the previous injunction made, and with the knowledge of all of the aspects of these proceedings, I do not further explore those matters.

5. The wife seeks the continuation of the injunction.  The husband is somewhat offended by the need of the injunction, but does not currently further object to a continuation thereof.  In the circumstances that is a very reasonable and I think proper approach. 

6. I will, on this occasion, reserve liberty to the husband through his solicitors to apply to the court to vary or discharge the injunction if particular circumstances arise as to make that a necessary and a proper application.

7. I will have these brief ex tempore reasons transcribed, placed upon the court file and made available to both parties.  In particular I do say, to emphasise, that there has not been a full and proper investigation of the factual basis for the injunctions and they are made exclusively on an interim basis and to better secure or protect assets or shareholdings pending any further hearing before the court which may or may not arise, subject to further evidence and the primary judgment delivered on the matters now before the court and, in particular, the re-opening of evidence.

I certify that the preceding seven
(7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons
for judgment of the Honourable Justice Young 30 August 2010

Associate: ……………………………………………………………

Date:  …………………………………………………………………