Danson and Danson and Anor (No 2)
Case
•
[2012] FamCA 1143
•29 November 2012
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Danson and Danson and Anor (No 2) [2012] FamCA 1143
[2012] FamCA 1143
29 November 2012
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In *Danson and Danson and Anor (No 2)*, Le Poer Trench J considered applications by both the husband and wife concerning property settlement and the welfare of the parties' children. The dispute involved the division of rental income and outgoings from a property, interim property settlement, and restrictions on the wife's discussions with the children and third parties regarding the husband's conduct.
The court was required to determine whether to grant interim orders for property settlement, how to manage the rental income and expenses of the C Street property, and what restrictions, if any, should be placed on the wife's communication with the children and others concerning allegations about the husband's conduct. The court also had to consider the wife's application filed on 17 August 2012 and the husband's response to an application filed on 19 September 2012.
The court ordered that rental income from the C Street property be divided equally between the parties, and that they contribute equally to all outgoings. The wife's application of 17 August 2012 was dismissed, and the husband's application for interim property settlement was refused. Significant orders were made restraining the wife from discussing the father's conduct with the children, and from discussing allegations concerning the father's conduct with any person other than specified professionals or court-nominated individuals. The wife was directed to file a response to the husband's application of 16 November 2012, with further hearings scheduled. Costs were reserved.
The court was required to determine whether to grant interim orders for property settlement, how to manage the rental income and expenses of the C Street property, and what restrictions, if any, should be placed on the wife's communication with the children and others concerning allegations about the husband's conduct. The court also had to consider the wife's application filed on 17 August 2012 and the husband's response to an application filed on 19 September 2012.
The court ordered that rental income from the C Street property be divided equally between the parties, and that they contribute equally to all outgoings. The wife's application of 17 August 2012 was dismissed, and the husband's application for interim property settlement was refused. Significant orders were made restraining the wife from discussing the father's conduct with the children, and from discussing allegations concerning the father's conduct with any person other than specified professionals or court-nominated individuals. The wife was directed to file a response to the husband's application of 16 November 2012, with further hearings scheduled. Costs were reserved.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Injunction
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
1