D'Cruz & Pierce

[2008] FamCA 819

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

D’CRUZ & PIERCE AND ORS [2008] FamCA 819

PROPERTY SETTLEMENT - Determination of pool of assets - Transaction to defeat claims - Assessment of whether the orders sought by the wife were anticipated in consideration of its magnitude and the length of time which has elapsed between the relevant disposition and the proceedings - Whether instrument a sham - Independence of a trustee - Effect of the rule in Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 when issues are clearly in dispute - Affording natural justice, when orders are sought against an entity who is not a party to proceedings, but whose sole shareholder and director is a party to proceedings - Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), s 106B

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

ANZ Banking Group and Harper (1988) FLC 91-938
Balnaves v Balnaves (1988) FLC 91-952
Halabi & Artillaga (1994) FLC 92-470
Sharrment Pty Ltd & Ors v The Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (1988) 18 FCR 449
Raftland Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (2008) 82 ALJR 934
Browne & Dunn (1893) 6 R 67
Seymour v The Australian Broadcasting Commission [1977] 19 NSWLR 219
Stern v National Australia Bank (2000) 171 ALR 192
Ascot Investments Pty Ltd v Harper (1981) 148 CLR 337
Whitaker & Whitaker (1980) FLC 90-813
Pflugradt & Pflugradt (1981) FLC 91-052
Ivanovic & Ivanovic (2000) FLC 93-003
Johnson & Johnson (2000) FLC 93-008
K & K [2001] FMCA Fam 237
S & M & Ors [2003] FamCA 1387

APPLICANT: Ms D’Cruz

1^st RESPONDENT: Mr M Pierce

2^nd RESPONDENT: Mr C Pierce

5^th RESPONDENT: Mr T

FILE NUMBER: MLF 3135 of 2004

DATE DELIVERED: 19 September 2008

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Dessau J

HEARING DATE: 16 May, 19-23 May, 26-29 May 2008

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Brown SC with Mr Dickson

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Kennedy Wisewoulds

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Lethbridge SC with Mr O'Shannassy

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Griffin Sweeney

Orders

1. That all existing applications shall be adjourned for mention before me at 10.00am on 29 October 2008 to consider the orders to be made arising from my reasons for judgment delivered on 19 September 2008.

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

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: MLF 3135 of 2004

MS D’CRUZ

Applicant

And

MR M PIERCE

Respondent

MR C PIERCE

2^nd Respondent

MR T

5^th Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A.  Introduction………………………………………………………….

B.  The parties’ backgrounds…………………………………………...

C.  The business background

C.1          The husband’s work from 1989 to June 1995

C.2          The JC partnership June to October 1995.

C.3          Late 1995 until the sale to ARC in around December 1996…..…...

C.4          The events triggered by ARC’s September 1997 announcement     to demutualise……………………………………………………...

C.5          The Supreme Court litigation from mid-2000 to late 2002

C.6          The 2004 to 2006 transactions

D.…