GROHL & ACLAND

Case [2019] FamCA 261


FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GROHL & ACLAND [2019] FamCA 261
FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – INJUNCTIONS AS TO PROPERTY – Where application for injunctions and ancillary orders restraining husband from dealing with property – Where previous order made by consent that the husband give six weeks’ notice of any intention to deal with the property – Discussion of applicable principles – Where no proper basis for injunction – Where previous orders continued.
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss  90RD, 114 
Martin & Martin and Ors [2013] FamCA 222
Waugh & Waugh [2000] FamCA 1183
APPLICANT: Ms Grohl
RESPONDENT: Mr Acland
FILE NUMBER: WOC 692 of 2016
DATE DELIVERED: 26 April 2019
PLACE DELIVERED: Parramatta
PLACE HEARD: Parramatta
JUDGMENT OF: Foster J
HEARING DATE: 15 April 2019

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Ms Dart
SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Sydney Family Law Specialists Pty Ltd
COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Givney
SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Apex Legal

Orders

  1. That, pending further order, in the event the respondent husband seeks to sell, transfer, assign, encumber or otherwise deal with or dispose of in any manner his interest in Property E in the state of New South Wales he shall provide the applicant wife with not less than six weeks’ notice in writing of such intention together with:

    (a)      The full details and particulars of such intended dealing;

    (b)      Documents to verify the intended dealing; and

    (c)Such other information related to the intended dealing as is reasonably requested by the applicant.

  2. Liberty to either party to apply on short notice as to implementation or enforcement of the above order.

  3. That, otherwise, the Application in a Case filed 17 January 2019 be dismissed.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Grohl & Acland has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT PARRAMATTA

FILE NUMBER: WOC 692  of 2016

Ms Grohl

Applicant

And

Mr Acland

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. In the context of ongoing de facto property proceedings there arises a discrete issue for disposition.

  2. On 17 January 2019 the de facto wife, the applicant in the primary proceedings, filed an Application in a Case seeking various injunctive and other orders relating to the de facto respondent husband’s interest in Property E, New South Wales. 

  3. In summary, the wife sought orders as follows:

    a)that the respondent be restrained from selling, transferring, encumbering, assigning or, otherwise, dealing with or disposing of in any manner his interest in the subject property without first obtaining the written consent of…

Continue reading GROHL & ACLAND

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
GROHL & ACLAND [2019] FamCA 261
Case
[2019] FamCA 261
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Grohl & Acland*, Foster J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the wife for injunctions and ancillary orders restraining the husband from dealing with certain property. This application followed a previous consent order which stipulated that the husband was to provide six weeks' notice of any intention to deal with the property.

The central legal issue before the court was whether there was a proper basis to grant the injunctions sought by the wife, or whether the existing consent orders should continue. The court was required to assess the evidence presented by the wife to determine if it met the threshold for imposing further restraints on the husband's dealings with his property.

Foster J discussed the applicable principles for granting injunctions in such circumstances. His Honour found that no proper basis had been established for the wife's application for injunctions. Consequently, the court ordered that the previous consent orders regarding notice of dealings with Property E in New South Wales would continue.

The court made specific orders that, pending further order, the respondent husband must provide the applicant wife with not less than six weeks' written notice of any intention to sell, transfer, assign, encumber, or otherwise deal with his interest in Property E. This notice must include full details of the intended dealing, verifying documents, and any other reasonably requested information. Liberty was granted to either party to apply on short notice regarding the implementation or enforcement of this order. Otherwise, the wife's application filed on 17 January 2019 was dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

That, pending further order, in the event the respondent husband seeks to sell, transfer, assign, encumber or otherwise deal with or dispose of in any manner his interest in Property E in the state of New South Wales he shall provide the applicant wife with not less than six weeks’ notice in writing of such intention together with:

(a) The full details and particulars of such intended dealing;

(b) Documents to verify the intended dealing; and

(c) Such other information related to the intended dealing as is reasonably requested by the applicant.

2.

Liberty to either party to apply on short notice as to implementation or enforcement of the above order.

3.

That, otherwise, the Application in a Case filed 17 January 2019 be dismissed.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.