Drummond and Piper

In *Drummond & Piper* [2013] FamCA 278, the Family Court of Australia considered an application by Ms Drummond (the applicant) against Mr Piper (the respondent) concerning the preservation of a motor vehicle and the admission of evidence. The proceedings were heard in Adelaide, with judgment delivered in Darwin by Dawe J.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether to grant an injunction requiring the return of a Holden Statesman Caprice motor vehicle to the applicant and restraining its removal by the respondent, and whether to grant the applicant leave to file an affidavit from her mother and for her mother to give evidence via video link. The Court also had to consider the question of jurisdiction, which was central to the underlying dispute regarding the parties' de facto relationship and the division of property.

Regarding the motor vehicle, Dawe J found that there was insufficient unchallenged evidence to support the significant order sought by the applicant for its return and for an injunction. The Court noted the conflicting assertions regarding the vehicle's ownership, use, and the parties' separation dates, and that the applicant's affidavit did not sufficiently demonstrate her inability to obtain alternative transport. Consequently, the application for the injunction concerning the motor vehicle was dismissed. However, the respondent was ordered to provide a written undertaking not to sell, dispose of, or encumber the vehicle until the conclusion of proceedings.

In relation to the proposed evidence from the applicant's mother, the Court granted the applicant leave to file an affidavit from her mother, with further consideration of its admissibility and the arrangements for video link evidence to be determined by the trial judge or registrar. The question of costs for the application and a specific sum incurred by the applicant in relation to the motor vehicle was reserved for the trial judge.