CORDELL & CORDELL

Case

[2015] FCCA 1391

29 April 2015


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
CORDELL & CORDELL [2015] FCCA 1391 [2015] FCCA 1391 29 April 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application for property settlement brought by the Applicant Wife against the Respondent Husband. The hearing proceeded undefended as the Respondent did not appear. The Court was required to consider the contributions of the parties and make adjustments for matters arising under section 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The Court also considered an application for costs.

The primary legal issues before the Court were the division of the former matrimonial home and other assets, the allocation of debts and liabilities, and the appropriate orders for the sale and distribution of proceeds from the former matrimonial home. The Court also had to determine whether solicitor-client costs were appropriate in the circumstances, given the Respondent's failure to appear and the Wife's application for costs.

Judge Scarlett ordered that the Applicant Wife have sole control over the listing and sale of the former matrimonial home, including appointing agents and solicitors, determining marketing strategies, and negotiating offers. Both parties were ordered to sign all necessary documents for the sale. The Court detailed how proceeds of sale were to be distributed, including payment of sale costs, discharge of the mortgage, and a division of the remaining balance, with the Wife receiving 79% and the Husband the balance, less specified deductions for costs and debts. The Husband was ordered to transfer jointly held shares to the Wife and to indemnify her for any tax liability. The division of furniture and furnishings was to be agreed upon, with a fallback "pick pile" method. Each party was to retain their individually held bank accounts, superannuation, vehicles, shares, businesses, and personalty, and was to be solely liable for their individual debts. The Court also made provision for a Registrar to sign documents if a party failed to do so and granted leave to apply regarding the implementation of the orders. The Husband was given 21 days to show cause why he should not pay the Wife's costs of $20,984.95.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

  • Civil Procedure

Legal Concepts

  • Costs

  • Remedies

  • Jurisdiction

  • Statutory Construction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

5

Statutory Material Cited

3

Stanford v Stanford [2012] HCA 52
Hickey & Hickey [2003] FamCA 395