Henschel & Sartre (No 6)
[2024] FedCFamC1F 883
•13 December 2024
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Henschel & Sartre (No 6) [2024] FedCFamC1F 883
File number: SYC 6123 of 2020 Judgment of: CAMPTON J Date of judgment: 13 December 2024 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Where the wife seeks the variation of an injunctive order preventing the husband from attending a real property more than once each calendar month to restrain him by injunction from attending the subject property for a specified period – Where the husband consents to the variation of such order on condition – Order made varying the injunctive order in the terms broadly as sought by the wife – Costs reserved to final hearing. Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 79 Cases cited: Henschel & Sartre [2023] FedCFamC1F 86 Division: Division 1 First Instance Number of paragraphs: 9 Date of hearing: 13 December 2024 Place: Sydney Solicitor for the Applicant: Mr Karras, Karras Partners Lawyers Solicitor for the Respondent: Ms Brochut, Barkus Doolan Winning ORDERS
SYC 6123 of 2020 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MS HENSCHEL
Applicant
AND: MR SARTRE
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
CAMPTON J
DATE OF ORDER:
13 DECEMBER 2024
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Pending further order and without admissions on the part of the husband the operation of Order 7 made 23 February 2023 be varied to restrain the husband from attending N Property, Town O (“N Property”) between 13 December 2024 and 26 January 2025 on the basis that such variation would otherwise not derogate from the order made on 23 February 2023.
2.Both parties’ costs of an incidental to the Application in a Proceeding of the wife filed on 9 December 2024 are reserved until trial.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Henschel & Sartre has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
CAMPTON J:
These reasons give context to the determination of an Application in a Proceeding filed by Ms Henschel (“the wife”) on 9 December 2024 and listed today with short notice, cast against the shadow of the substantive proceedings being listed for final trial before me as to the adjustment of the property interests of the parties pursuant to s 79 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”), over five days commencing on 3 March 2025.
By way of the Application in a Proceeding the wife seeks the variation of an injunctive order made on a defended basis by Berman J on 23 February 2023. The specific order subject to variation was Order 7 made on that day being in the following terms:
7.Providing that the respondent shall not attend the premises at [N Property], [Town O] (“the [Town O] property”) on more than one (1) occasion in each calendar month, the applicant will do all acts and things necessary to facilitate the respondents attendance at the property, providing that it shall occur on such dates and such times as the applicant will be residing in Sydney, with the respondent to provide twenty four (24) hours’ notice of his intention to attend.
The wife seeks the variation of Order 7 made 23 February 2023 in the following terms:
1.That the operation of Order 7 of the Orders on 23 February 2023 be varied to restrain the respondent from attending the [Town O] property under any circumstances between 6 December 2024 and 26 January 2025, but that such variation not otherwise derogate from the effect of such Order.
N Property, Town O, (“the Town O property”) is owned by a trust. There is a dispute between the parties as to the name of that trust. The wife says the name of the trust is the Mr Sartre and Ms Henschel Family Trust. The husband says the name of the trust is the Mr Sartre Family Trust. It is agreed that the trustee of that trust is B6 Pty Ltd.
The reasons for judgment delivered by Berman J on 23 February 2023 record a history of of a myriad of disputes between these parties, one being as to the use and occupation of the Town O property with conduct such as changing locks, installing cameras, and the removal of keys but to describe a few (see Henschel & Sartre [2023] FedCFamC1F 86). The property has been used for livestock purposes. It stores plant and equipment and other items of other related entities of the parties. It has been one of many constant sources of dispute between them.
Berman J, at [130] of his reasons delivered 23 February 2023, attempted to strike a balance in regulating the parties' access to and use of the Town O property pending further order in terms of Order 7 made 23 February 2023. That attempt to strike a balance has not achieved overwhelming success.
The wife, by way of the evidence in support of her current application, proposed travelling at this time to the United States of America and travelling in January to Country VV. The parties were in dispute as to the husband attending the property while the wife was overseas. She gives evidence of a desire to protect her personal effects at the property, including documents relevant to those proceedings. There may or may not be disputes between the parties about the care of livestock while she is away.
In any event, the husband says that, while putting into issue many of the contentions raised by the wife in her affidavit evidence in support of the urgently listed Application in a Proceeding, he is conscious that the final trial as to the adjustment of their property interests in a little over two months’ time. He has indicated that he will agree to the order sought by the wife in paragraph 1 of her Application in a Proceeding on 9 December 2024 on a without admissions basis.
For all the above reasons I make the orders as set out herein.
I certify that the preceding nine (9) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Ex Tempore Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Campton. Associate:
Dated: 19 December 2024
0