Emsden and Emsden & Anor

In the matter of *Emsden and Emsden & Anor*, Cronin J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the husband for the partial release of funds from a trust, which had been subject to injunctions restraining their use. These injunctions were in place following final property orders made in 2008, which the wife sought to alter or set aside under s 79A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The Commissioner of Taxation had also intervened in the proceedings, seeking to recover tax from the same trust funds.

The court was required to determine the merits of the wife's s 79A application, given its vagueness and unclear grounds, in the context of the husband's application for a partial release of funds. The court also considered the implications of the Tax Commissioner's intervention and the general need for candour in applications seeking to discharge or alter existing orders.

Cronin J found that there were significant unanswered questions regarding the wife's application and the overall financial position. The court emphasised the importance of clarity and precision in such applications, particularly when seeking to vary or discharge orders, and noted that the husband's application for a partial release of funds was not sufficiently substantiated in the circumstances.

Consequently, the court dismissed the interim orders sought by the husband and the wife, save for issues of costs. All applications were adjourned for a final hearing, with a detailed timetable set for the filing of amended applications, evidence, and financial statements by the wife, husband, and the Commissioner of Taxation. The court also directed that evidence in chief be given by affidavit and outlined requirements for case outlines and subpoenas.