Harnell and Harnell

[2009] FamCA 37

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

HARNELL & HARNELL [2009] FamCA 37

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Alteration of interest – Conciliation conference – Superannuation – Discovery

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Harnell

RESPONDENT: Mr Harnell

FILE NUMBER: MLC 7602 of 2008

DATE DELIVERED: 15 January 2009

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Cronin J

HEARING DATE: 15 January 2009

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr R.N. Hoult

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Lander & Rogers

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr P.D. Sweeney

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Wilsons Lawyers

Orders

1. That pursuant to s 44(3) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), the wife be granted leave to proceed with her application for alteration of property interests filed 20 August 2008.

BY CONSENT OF THE PARTIES

1. The parties attend a conciliation conference on 6 March 2009 at 2.15pm.

2. The husband file an amended response within 14 days.

3. That for the purposes of the conference referred to in paragraph 2 hereof, each party obtain market appraisals of any real property owned by them or either of them (other than the property at B) or in which they have an interest and exchange those appraisals at least 7 days prior to the conference.

4. That the husband provide discovery of documents relevant to the receipt by him of superannuation entitlements from the ESSS fund and the purchase and sale of any real property since 1981.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Harnell & Harnell is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: MLC 7602 of 2008

MS HARNELL

Applicant

And

MR HARNELL

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application brought by the wife for orders under s 44 sub-s (3).

2. The parties married in 1961 and separated in 1975 and are both now in or around the 70 years of age.  They have been separated for a long time.  In fact, over 20 years.

3. Section 44(3) requires a court to be satisfied that hardship would be granted to a party if the application were not granted.

4. I have read the affidavit material of the wife and I am satisfied that this is a case in which I ought to exercise the discretion for all of the reasons that have been set out in the relevant authorities.

5. It is to be noted that the husband does not oppose the order being made. In those circumstances I will make an order pursuant to s 44(3) of the Act that the wife be granted leave to proceed with her application for alteration of property interests. That application having already been filed on 20 August 2008.

6. I will otherwise make orders by consent in terms of paragraphs 2 to 5 of the minutes signed by the parties this day.  I will also make a further order that the reasons be transcribed.

I certify that the preceding Six (6) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Cronin

Associate: 

Date:  27 January 2009