Gabrys and Gabrys and Ors

In the matter of *Gabrys and Gabrys and Ors*, Stevenson J of the Supreme Court of New South Wales was required to determine a dispute between a husband and wife concerning the sale of a property held by a company of which they were directors, F Pty Limited. The proceedings also involved the discharge of an order joining Mr Nesbitt as a party and the expedition of the final hearing.

The primary legal issues before the court revolved around the practical steps and mechanisms required to effect the sale of the property located at Z Street, Suburb P. This included determining the process for appointing legal representatives and real estate agents, setting a reserve price, managing the auction process, and stipulating how the sale proceeds were to be distributed. The court also considered the husband's obligations regarding prior court orders made on 22 April 2014, including the potential use of another property as security.

Stevenson J, by consent of the parties, made detailed orders to facilitate the sale of the property. These orders mandated the appointment of a lawyer and a real estate agent within specified timeframes, with mechanisms for nomination by professional bodies if the parties could not agree. The property was to be listed for public auction within six weeks of agent appointment, with a reserve price initially set at $2,000,000 or a mutually agreed valuation. The court also provided for subsequent valuations and adjustments to the reserve price if the property remained unsold. Crucially, the orders stipulated the priority of distribution of sale proceeds, with costs and rates to be paid first, followed by the balance to be held in an interest-earning account for the Gabrys Superannuation Fund, accessible only by agreement or further court order. The husband was also directed to use his best endeavours to comply with previous orders and was granted liberty to offer another property as security. Liberty was reserved for the parties to restore the proceedings to the list if the husband failed to comply with the prior orders.