Ettridge and Somers (No. 4)

In the matter of *Ettridge and Somers (No. 4)*, Cronin J of the Family Court of Australia considered a dispute between the applicant and respondent concerning the sale of a property. The proceedings arose from disagreements regarding the practical arrangements for the sale, necessitating court intervention to vary the existing property settlement orders.

The court was required to determine the specific terms and machinery provisions for the sale of the real property located at B Street, Suburb C. This included appointing a sale agent, setting auction dates, establishing a reserve price, defining settlement terms, capping advertising and preparation expenses, and fixing the agent's commission. The court also had to address the respondent's cooperation with the sale process and consider an application for costs.

Cronin J reasoned that the existing orders were insufficient to facilitate the sale due to the respondent's lack of cooperation. The court therefore discharged a previous order and appointed Mr FF of the FF Group as the agent for the sale. Specific directions were given regarding the auction dates, a reserve price of $880,000, a 60-day settlement period, advertising expenses capped at $3,000, and an agent's commission of 1.32 per cent of the gross sale price. The respondent was ordered to sign necessary authorisations for Mr FF and make the property available for inspections and the auction. Mr GG was appointed as the conveyancing solicitor. The applicant was authorised to attend the auction. The court also ordered the respondent to pay the applicant's costs fixed at $2,270, to be paid from the respondent's share of the sale proceeds. Liberty to apply was granted to the applicant regarding any non-cooperation by the respondent.