FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| HANAS & JOLAHA (NO. 4) | [2019] FamCA 483 |
| FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim application – Where the wife seeks orders for spousal maintenance and partial property distribution in the sum of $50,000 for litigation funding – Where the husband seeks orders that the wife’s application for financial relief to be dismissed – Where the husband is the primary financial contributor – Where the wife is the primary carer of the child of the relationship and homemaker – Where the husband has predominant control of and access to the matrimonial property pool–– Where the Court finds, that, it is both in the interest of justice and just and equitable for an order to be made for a partial property distribution pursuant to ss 79 and 80 to assist in payment of the wife’s legal fees – Orders made for the amount of $50,000 to be paid to the wife – Where the Court finds that the wife is unable to adequately support herself as a result of having the primary care of a child under the age of 18 years – Where the Court finds that the husband has financial resources which enable him to pay spousal maintenance – Orders made for periodic spousal maintenance – Orders made for spousal maintenance for wife’s anticipated rental accommodation – Order for lump sum maintenance made to pay the rental bond. |
| Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 72, 74, 75, 79, 80, 114, 117. Family Law Rules 2004 r 4.15. The Constitution of Australia ss 51(xxi), 51(xxii). |
| Aitken & Murphy (No 2) [2012] FamCA 239 AMS v AIF (1999) 163 ALR 501 Bing & Bing (2007) FLC 93-318 Brown & Brown (2007) FLC 93-316 Carlisle & Carlisle [2017] FCCA 1956 Carmel-Fevia & Fevia (No. 3) [2012] FamCA 631 Davidson & Davidson (No. 2) (1994) FLC 92-469 Dickons v Dickons (2012) 50 FamLR 244 Dougherty & Dougherty (1987) 163 CLR 278. Farmer v Bramley (2000) 27 FamLR 316 Felice & Felice [2011] FamCA 162 Gabel & Yardley (2008) FLC 93-386 Gazzo & Comptroller of Stamps (Vic); Ex Parte Attorney-General (Vic) (1981) 149 CLR 227 Gresham & Gresham [2018] FamCA 841 Grier & Malphas (2016) 55 FamLR 107 Harris & Harris (1993) FLC 92-378 Hyman v Hyman (1929) 98 LJP 91 In the Marriage of J.M. and Y.A. Redman (1987) FLC 91-805 Iphostrou & Iphostrou and Ors [2011] FamCA 20 M v M (2006) 36 FamLR 97 Medlow & Medlow (2016) 54 FamLR 389 Monaghan and Farrer [2018] FamCA 178 Paris King Investments Pty Ltd v Rayhill [2006] NSWSC 578 R v Watson; Ex parte Armstrong (1976) 136 CLR 248 Saxena and Saxena (2006) FLC 93-268 Stanford & Stanford (2012) FLC 93-518 Strahan & Strahan (Interim Property Orders) (2011) FLC 93-466 Vautin & Vautin (1998) 23 FamLR 627 FLC Wenz & Archer (2008) 40 FamLR 212 White v Overland [2001] FCA 1333 Yeh & Jyu [2014] FamCA 162 Yunghanns & Ors v Yunghanns & Ors (1999) FLC 92-836 Zschokke &… |
Continue reading Hanas & Jolaha (No. 4)
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Hanas & Jolaha (No. 4) [2019] FamCA 483
- Case
- [2019] FamCA 483
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether to grant the wife's interim applications for financial relief, specifically concerning spousal maintenance and a property distribution to fund her legal expenses, and whether to dismiss her application as sought by the husband. The central question was whether it was just and equitable to make such interim orders given the parties' respective roles and financial positions within the relationship.
McClelland DCJ found that it was both in the interest of justice and just and equitable to make orders for a partial property distribution pursuant to sections 79 and 80 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) to assist in the payment of the wife's legal fees. The court reasoned that the wife was unable to adequately support herself due to her role as the primary carer of a child under 18 years, and that the husband possessed the financial resources to meet these obligations. Consequently, the court ordered the husband to pay $50,000 to the wife for her legal expenses. Additionally, the court ordered periodic spousal maintenance of $720 per week, rent assistance of up to $650 per week for the wife's accommodation, and a lump sum of $2,600 for her rental bond.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Court orders, pending further order, that:
1.
That within 28 days, the husband pay to the wife the sum of $50,000 by way of interim property distribution, such sum to be retained by the wife's solicitors and applied to the wife's legal expenses related to these proceedings.
2.
That by way of periodic spousal maintenance pursuant to s 74 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), the husband pay to the wife cleared funds in the sum of $720 per week into an account nominated by the wife, the first payment to be made within seven (7) days of this order.
3.
That the husband pay the wife's rent up to an amount of $650 per week from the date of commencement of her next residential lease by payment directly to the real estate agency managing the property, such payments are to be paid in advance if required by the agency.
4.
That the husband pay the wife's rental bond up to the amount of $2,600 as required by the real estate agency, and be reimbursed the bond sum upon the termination of the rental lease.
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.