Green and Green
Case
•
[2009] FamCA 660
•25 June 2009
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Green and Green [2009] FamCA 660
[2009] FamCA 660
25 June 2009
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The parties to this proceeding were the Husband and the Wife. The dispute concerned various financial matters and arrangements for the children, likely within the context of family law proceedings. The orders were made by Dessau J.
The court was required to determine a range of issues, including the valuation of specific assets such as the H property, R property, and the Husband's business. Further issues involved the disclosure of documents, the preparation of a family report, and interim arrangements for the occupation of properties. The court also addressed the repayment of specified liabilities, the payment of mortgages, school fees and expenses for the children, and private health insurance. Additionally, the court considered spousal maintenance and the drawing down of funds from a mortgage.
The court's reasoning and the legal principles applied are reflected in the orders made, which were largely by consent. These orders established a framework for the parties to proceed, including the scheduling of a conciliation conference and the appointment of experts for asset valuations and a family report. The orders also provided for interim property occupation, the repayment of debts from specified accounts with the balance to be divided equally, and ongoing mortgage payments. Specific arrangements were made for school fees and expenses for the children, and for spousal maintenance. The court also issued mutual restraining orders preventing the disposal of assets except in the ordinary course of business or for day-to-day expenditure, and prohibiting the denigration of the other party in the presence of the children.
By consent, the court ordered that the parties attend a conciliation conference and, if agreement could not be reached on asset valuations, a jointly appointed expert would be instructed. The parties were ordered to make full and frank disclosure of documents. Interim property occupation was granted to the Wife at the H property and to the Husband at the P property, with specific responsibilities for costs. Certain liabilities were to be repaid from designated bank accounts, with the remaining balance to be divided equally. The Husband was ordered to pay mortgages and school fees for two children, while the Wife was ordered to pay school fees for the third child. The Husband was also to maintain private health insurance. Not by consent, the parties were permitted to draw down $40,000 each from the mortgage secured against the H property, the characterisation of which was to be determined by the Trial Judge. The Husband was permitted to collect personal items from the H property. Mutual restraining orders were imposed regarding asset dealings and conduct in the presence of the children. By consent, the Husband was ordered to pay spousal maintenance of $236 per week to the Wife. The orders incorporated particulars of obligations and consequences of contravention, and certified for counsel. A notation indicated that interim orders were made on the basis of the current child support assessment continuing, and payments made under these orders would not be credited against that assessment.
The court was required to determine a range of issues, including the valuation of specific assets such as the H property, R property, and the Husband's business. Further issues involved the disclosure of documents, the preparation of a family report, and interim arrangements for the occupation of properties. The court also addressed the repayment of specified liabilities, the payment of mortgages, school fees and expenses for the children, and private health insurance. Additionally, the court considered spousal maintenance and the drawing down of funds from a mortgage.
The court's reasoning and the legal principles applied are reflected in the orders made, which were largely by consent. These orders established a framework for the parties to proceed, including the scheduling of a conciliation conference and the appointment of experts for asset valuations and a family report. The orders also provided for interim property occupation, the repayment of debts from specified accounts with the balance to be divided equally, and ongoing mortgage payments. Specific arrangements were made for school fees and expenses for the children, and for spousal maintenance. The court also issued mutual restraining orders preventing the disposal of assets except in the ordinary course of business or for day-to-day expenditure, and prohibiting the denigration of the other party in the presence of the children.
By consent, the court ordered that the parties attend a conciliation conference and, if agreement could not be reached on asset valuations, a jointly appointed expert would be instructed. The parties were ordered to make full and frank disclosure of documents. Interim property occupation was granted to the Wife at the H property and to the Husband at the P property, with specific responsibilities for costs. Certain liabilities were to be repaid from designated bank accounts, with the remaining balance to be divided equally. The Husband was ordered to pay mortgages and school fees for two children, while the Wife was ordered to pay school fees for the third child. The Husband was also to maintain private health insurance. Not by consent, the parties were permitted to draw down $40,000 each from the mortgage secured against the H property, the characterisation of which was to be determined by the Trial Judge. The Husband was permitted to collect personal items from the H property. Mutual restraining orders were imposed regarding asset dealings and conduct in the presence of the children. By consent, the Husband was ordered to pay spousal maintenance of $236 per week to the Wife. The orders incorporated particulars of obligations and consequences of contravention, and certified for counsel. A notation indicated that interim orders were made on the basis of the current child support assessment continuing, and payments made under these orders would not be credited against that assessment.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Consent
-
Discovery
-
Costs
-
Injunction
-
Remedies
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Green and Green [2009] FamCA 660
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0