Dunne and Dunne

In the matter of Dunne and Dunne, Young J of the Family Court of Australia made orders concerning property settlement and disclosure between the husband and wife. The dispute involved the production of documentary evidence of assets, monies, and investments, the delivery of a motor vehicle, a partial settlement of property, and restraints on dealings with real property held within a superannuation fund.

The court was required to determine the extent of disclosure of financial documents by both parties, the quantum of a lump sum payment to be made by the husband to the wife as a partial property settlement, and whether any restraints should be placed on the husband's dealings with real property within his superannuation fund. Additionally, the court considered the dismissal of certain orders sought by the parties and the appointment of a single expert valuer for real property.

Young J ordered that within twenty-one days, the husband was to produce documentary evidence of his assets as at February 1997, including copies of personal and superannuation taxation returns not previously disclosed. The wife was also ordered to produce specified documents from the husband's Form 2A response, excluding certain sub-paragraphs. The husband was ordered to deliver spare keys for a Honda Accord motor vehicle to the wife. As a partial settlement of property, the husband was to pay the wife a further lump sum of $150,000 within twenty-one days, with provisions for interest in default. A restraint was placed on the husband from selling or encumbering real property within his superannuation fund, save for liberty to approach the court for sale to fund the partial payment. No restraint was placed on dealings in publicly listed shares, provided quarterly accounts were provided to the other party's solicitors. Certain orders sought by the wife were dismissed, and the matter was referred to the trial notice list. The parties were ordered to confer and engage a single expert valuer for all real property, with the costs of reports and the valuer's evidence to be shared equally, though the husband was to initially pay any pre-trial accounts with reimbursement from the wife. No order was made as to costs.