Delong and Delong
Case
•
[2013] FCCA 2102
•13 December 2013
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
DELONG & DELONG
[2013] FCCA 2102
[2013] FCCA 2102
13 December 2013
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of *Delong and Delong*, heard by Judge Riley, the court was required to make orders concerning the division of property and the resolution of financial disputes between the parties. The dispute centred on the disposition of a property, the allocation of sale proceeds, and the division of other assets and liabilities.
The court was tasked with determining how the parties' various assets and liabilities should be divided, including the sale of a jointly owned property, the discharge of existing debts, and the distribution of the remaining sale proceeds. Further issues included the division of furniture and other personal property, the allocation of bank accounts and superannuation benefits, and the respective liabilities for any encumbrances on the property. The court also needed to address the conduct of the property sale and the process for executing necessary documents.
Judge Riley ordered that the respondent vacate the property within 30 days of service of the orders. The property was to be sold out of court, with the proceeds first covering sale costs and commissions, then a bank mortgage and a credit card debt in the applicant's name. The balance was to be held by the applicant's lawyers and divided equally, subject to the respondent's share being reduced by specific amounts paid by the applicant towards the mortgage and future payments for the mortgage, rates, and reasonable sale preparation costs. The applicant was granted sole conduct of the sale. Furniture was to be divided equally, and each party was to retain sole entitlement to other property in their possession, including bank accounts and superannuation, with each party being solely liable for and indemnifying the other against any liabilities encumbering their respective entitlements. The court also provided a mechanism for a Registrar to execute documents on behalf of a party who refused to do so, and ordered the respondent to pay the applicant's costs.
The court was tasked with determining how the parties' various assets and liabilities should be divided, including the sale of a jointly owned property, the discharge of existing debts, and the distribution of the remaining sale proceeds. Further issues included the division of furniture and other personal property, the allocation of bank accounts and superannuation benefits, and the respective liabilities for any encumbrances on the property. The court also needed to address the conduct of the property sale and the process for executing necessary documents.
Judge Riley ordered that the respondent vacate the property within 30 days of service of the orders. The property was to be sold out of court, with the proceeds first covering sale costs and commissions, then a bank mortgage and a credit card debt in the applicant's name. The balance was to be held by the applicant's lawyers and divided equally, subject to the respondent's share being reduced by specific amounts paid by the applicant towards the mortgage and future payments for the mortgage, rates, and reasonable sale preparation costs. The applicant was granted sole conduct of the sale. Furniture was to be divided equally, and each party was to retain sole entitlement to other property in their possession, including bank accounts and superannuation, with each party being solely liable for and indemnifying the other against any liabilities encumbering their respective entitlements. The court also provided a mechanism for a Registrar to execute documents on behalf of a party who refused to do so, and ordered the respondent to pay the applicant's costs.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Property Law
-
Equity & Trusts
Legal Concepts
-
Remedies
-
Costs
-
Injunction
-
Constructive Trust
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
DELONG & DELONG
[2013] FCCA 2102
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
5
Statutory Material Cited
0
Stanford v Stanford
[2012] HCA 52
Wirth v Wirth
[1956] HCA 71
Stanford v Stanford
[2012] HCA 52