Dunstable & Idanov (No. 2)

In the matter of *Dunstable & Idanov (No. 2)*, heard by McEvoy J, the husband, Mr. Idanov, sought to vary final orders made on 17 February 2021 by Hartnett J. The husband's primary request was for a stay of the enforcement of these orders, alternatively seeking an extension of time for payment and related provisions concerning the sale of a property. The wife opposed the application, arguing that the husband possessed sufficient assets to satisfy existing costs orders and other court mandates, and that the property Hartnett J had ordered sold was chosen due to its substantial equity.

The central legal issues before McEvoy J were whether to grant a stay of enforcement of the existing final orders, or to extend the time for compliance with those orders, particularly regarding the sale of a property. The court was also required to consider the wife's submissions regarding the husband's capacity to meet his obligations and the appropriateness of revisiting orders made after a contested trial.

McEvoy J reasoned that it would not be appropriate to revisit the orders previously made by Hartnett J following a contested trial. The court found that the husband had not demonstrated that his proposed alternative course of action would enable him to make the required payment to the wife. Consequently, the husband's application was dismissed. The court further ordered the husband to pay the wife's costs fixed at $2,500.