HAINES & WILLIS

In the matter of Haines & Willis, the husband sought an interim property settlement, while the wife applied for the interim sale of a real property. The court was required to determine whether it was appropriate to exercise its power to make an interim property settlement in favour of the husband and whether the wife's application for the sale of the property should be granted.

The court considered the husband's application for an interim property settlement and the wife's application for the interim sale of a property. The legal issues revolved around the court's power to grant interim property settlements under the relevant legislation and the appropriateness of such orders in the circumstances, as well as the source of power for an interim sale of property, specifically whether it fell under section 79 or section 114(e) of the Family Law Act.

Thornton J reasoned that it was just and equitable to grant an interim property settlement to the husband. The court ordered that the husband be paid $2.5 million from the proceeds of sale of the "C Property," which was held in trust. This sum was to be deemed the husband's property at the final trial or upon the making of final orders, irrespective of its application or value change. The court also noted a prior consent order for the husband to receive $500,000 from the same property proceeds. The wife's application for the interim sale of the "F Town property" was refused. The remaining applications by both parties were dismissed, save for costs, with certain aspects to be consolidated with the final hearing.