Daily & Daily (No. 2)

In *Daily & Daily (No. 2)*, Ms Daily (the applicant wife) sought a lump sum payment by way of litigation funding or spousal maintenance from Mr Daily (the respondent husband). This application followed the setting aside of a binding financial agreement, with the Full Court having previously allowed an appeal and remitted the matter. The husband did not oppose the order sought but questioned the Court's jurisdiction to make it.

The central legal issue before Berman J was whether the Court possessed the jurisdiction to grant the wife's application for litigation funding or spousal maintenance, particularly in light of the husband's jurisdictional challenge. The Court was also required to consider whether the wife had an arguable case for substantive relief, a point the Full Court had already accepted.

Berman J reasoned that the Court had the power to make the consent orders sought by the parties. The judge noted that the Full Court had already accepted that the wife had an arguable case, and that impecuniosity on the part of the applicant to repay any litigation funding was not, in itself, a barrier to such an order. The judge concluded that the Court had the power to make the consent order as sought.

The Court ordered that the husband pay $110,000 to the trust account of Norman Waterhouse Lawyers for and on behalf of the wife. To give effect to this, the husband and wife were directed to take all necessary steps to withdraw this sum from their joint Westpac Investment Account.