CUMMINS & CREIGHTON

In *Cummins & Creighton*, Foster J considered applications for interim property orders in a family law proceeding. The dispute concerned the division of assets, with the wife seeking to sell a particular motor vehicle and the husband agreeing to this in principle, while also seeking a similar order himself. The court noted that the asset pool was reasonably well identified, but there was no readily available cash pool from which interim provision could be made.

The central legal issue before the court was whether it was appropriate to make interim orders for the distribution of property in the circumstances presented. This involved considering the general principles governing interim property orders and determining if the specific facts warranted such orders, particularly in the absence of a clear cash fund. The court also had to decide on the appropriate preservation of other assets.

Foster J reasoned that while general principles often favour preserving assets until final trial, interim orders for distribution can be made where appropriate. In this instance, the court found it appropriate to make an order for the sale of one motor vehicle by the wife, with the proceeds to be retained by her, subject to final determination at trial. The court also made orders preserving other items of personalty, including restraining the husband from disposing of a second motor vehicle and the wife from disposing of its compliance plate, pending further order. All other pending interim applications were dismissed.