Farrow and Farrow (No 2)

This case concerned a dispute between a husband and wife regarding property settlement and interim litigation costs. The wife sought to set aside consent orders made in June 2020, arguing she had not provided informed consent and could not meet the financial obligations imposed by those orders. The husband sought the sale of a jointly owned property and the disbursement of proceeds to him in accordance with the earlier consent orders. The wife also sought the sale of a different jointly owned property.

The court was required to determine whether to set aside the June 2020 consent orders, the husband's application for interim litigation costs funding, and how to proceed with the sale of two jointly owned properties to facilitate a partial property settlement. The wife also sought the return of a dog, which was resisted by the husband.

Justice Forrest discharged significant portions of the June 2020 consent orders, including those relating to the wife's financial obligations to the husband and the disposition of certain assets. The husband's application for interim periodic spousal maintenance was dismissed. The court ordered the sale of two jointly owned properties, outlining detailed procedures for their sale by private treaty or, if necessary, by auction, including provisions for agreeing on agents, list prices, sale prices, and reserve prices. The court also made orders regarding the occupation of the properties pending sale, the distribution of sale proceeds, and financial arrangements related to the wife borrowing from business entities. Injunctions were imposed on the wife restraining her from certain actions concerning discretionary trusts and company directorships, and she was ordered to provide financial documents to the husband. The wife's application for the return of the dog was dismissed.