Huang & Wen

Case [2022] FedCFamC1F 194


FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

(DIVISION 1)

Huang & Wen [2022] FedCFamC1F 194

File number(s): SYC 1300 of 2018
Judgment of: REES J
Date of judgment: 30 March 2022
Catchwords:

FAMILY LAW – THIRD PARTIES – Application to join third parties – Where no Amended Initiating Application was filed seeking substantive orders against third parties – Application dismissed.

FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTIONS – Where the wife established a prima facie case that the husband has diverted matrimonial assets to his children – Risk of those assets being further alienated – Orders restraining the children from dealing with that property adverse to the wife’s interest.

FAMILY LAW – INTERIM PROPERTY – Application for partial property settlement by the wife – Material non-disclosure by the husband – Where the relief sought by the wife is significantly less than the amount the husband, on his own case, asserts she will receive by way of final distribution – Wife to receive $200,000 partial property settlement.

Legislation: Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) r 3.03
Division: Division 1 First Instance
Number of paragraphs: 38
Date of hearing: 25 March 2022
Place: Sydney
Counsel for the Applicant: Ms McMahon
Solicitor for the Applicant: William Chan & Co Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondent: Ms McConaghy
Solicitor for the Respondent: My Solicitors & Notaries

ORDERS

SYC 1300 of 2018

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)

BETWEEN:

MS HUANG

Applicant

AND:

MR WEN

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

REES J

DATE OF ORDER:

30 MARCH 2022

THE COURT ORDERS:

1.That pending further order, Ms C Wen is restrained from selling, dealing with or further encumbering the properties at L Street, Suburb M, NSW, Folio Identifier … and 1 N Street, Suburb P, NSW, Folio Identifier ….

2.That pending further order, Mr B Wen is restrained from selling, dealing with or further encumbering the property at 2 N Street, Suburb P, NSW, Folio Identifier ....

3.That the parties cause the funds held in controlled monies on their behalf by Q Lawyers to be forwarded to the wife’s solicitors to be held in controlled monies on their behalf.

4.That from the controlled monies held by the wife’s solicitor on behalf of the husband and the wife, the parties cause the sum of $200,000 to be paid to the wife by way of partial property settlement.

5.That within 28 days the husband provide full and complete disclosure of all of the documents referred to in the letter of Q Lawyers dated 22 November 2021.

6.That the wife’s Applications in a Proceeding filed 9 December 2021 and 3 February 2022 are otherwise dismissed.

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…

Continue reading Huang & Wen

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Wen & Huang [2022] FedCFamC1F 194
Case
[2022] FedCFamC1F 194
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Huang & Wen involved proceedings brought by Ms C Huang against Mr B Wen, her estranged husband, in the Family Court of Australia. The dispute encompassed several significant issues, including an application by Ms Huang to join third parties, an application for an injunction to prevent alienation of matrimonial assets, and a request for a partial property settlement. The court had to determine whether the wife's application to join third parties could proceed without an amended initiating application and whether an injunction was warranted to prevent the husband from diverting matrimonial assets to his children. Additionally, the court needed to address the wife's application for a partial property settlement, particularly given the husband's material non-disclosure of certain assets.

The court first considered the application to join third parties and found that without an amended initiating application seeking substantive orders against these parties, the application could not proceed. In relation to the injunction, the court was satisfied that Ms Huang had established a prima facie case that Mr Wen had diverted matrimonial assets to his children. Given the risk of further alienation of those assets, the court granted an order restraining the children from dealing with the properties in question. The court also addressed the wife's application for a partial property settlement, noting the husband's material non-disclosure. Despite the husband's assertion that the wife would receive less than the amount sought, the court ordered a partial property settlement of $200,000. Furthermore, the court ordered the husband to provide full disclosure of documents within 28 days.

In summary, the court dismissed the wife's application to join third parties and granted several significant orders. It restrained the children from dealing with specified properties, ordered a partial property settlement of $200,000, and mandated full disclosure by the husband within 28 days. The wife's other applications were dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

THE COURT ORDERS:

1. That pending further order, Ms C Wen is restrained from selling, dealing with or further encumbering the properties at L Street, Suburb M, NSW, Folio Identifier … and 1 N Street, Suburb P, NSW, Folio Identifier ….

2. That pending further order, Mr B Wen is restrained from selling, dealing with or further encumbering the property at 2 N Street, Suburb P, NSW, Folio Identifier ....

3. That the parties cause the funds held in controlled monies on their behalf by Q Lawyers to be forwarded to the wife’s solicitors to be held in controlled monies on their behalf.

4. That from the controlled monies held by the wife’s solicitor on behalf of the husband and the wife, the parties cause the sum of $200,000 to be paid to the wife by way of partial property settlement.

5. That within 28 days the husband provide full and complete disclosure of all of the documents referred to in the letter of Q Lawyers dated 22 November 2021.

6. That the wife’s Applications in a Proceeding filed 9 December 2021 and 3 February 2022 are otherwise dismissed.

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.