G and T (2004) FLC 93-176 McD and McD (unreported) O’Ryan J 8 October 2001 McL and McL (unreported) 30 January 2003, O’Reilly J Strahan (2009) FamCAFC 166
APPLICANT:
Ms Iphostrou
RESPONDENT:
Mr Iphostrou
SECOND RESPONDENT:
P Iphostrou
THIRD RESPONDENT:
J Iphostrou
FILE NUMBER:
MLC
8731
of
2009
DATE DELIVERED:
18 January 2011
PLACE DELIVERED:
Melbourne
PLACE HEARD:
Melbourne
JUDGMENT OF:
THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE CRONIN
HEARING DATE:
13 December 2010
REPRESENTATION
COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT:
MR BURNSIDE QC WITH MR THOMPSON
SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT:
HALLETT WEST
COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT:
MR NORTH SC WITH MR WOOD
SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT:
BELLELI KING & ASSOCIATES
COUNSEL FOR THE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS & ORS:
MR DENTON SC WITH MS DJOHAN
SOLICITOR FOR THE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS & ORS:
NATALIE ROMPOTIS
Orders
That within seven (7) days after the payment by or on behalf of the husband of any money in payment of accounts rendered by his solicitors including in relation to expenses associated with the preparation of his case, the husband pay or cause to be paid the same sum of money to the solicitors for the wife.
That within 24 hours after the payment by or on behalf of the husband of any money referred to in paragraph (1) of these orders, the husband cause to be given to the wife’s solicitors, a memorandum stating the amount or amounts so paid to the solicitors.
That all money paid to the solicitors for the husband including on his behalf arising out of paragraph (1) of these orders shall be held in trust by the solicitors for the husband and not applied in payment until such time as the same amount has been paid by or on behalf of the husband to the solicitors for the wife.
In the event that the payment referred to in paragraph (3) is not made within seven (7) days thereafter, the husband is to direct his solicitors to pay 50 per cent of whatever is received and held by them in trust, to the solicitors for the wife.
That the amounts paid pursuant to these orders to the solicitors for the wife are to be applied by them in payment of the costs and disbursements incurred by the wife in the conduct of these proceedings.
That the question of the categorisation of any payments made pursuant to these orders shall be matters for determination by the trial judge.
That the wife’s application for interim orders relating to litigation funding be otherwise dismissed.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Iphostrou & Iphostrou is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE
FILE NUMBER: MLC 8731 of 2009
MS IPHOSTROU
Applicant
And
MR IPHOSTROU
Grounds of appeal
[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.
[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.
[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.
Consideration
[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.
[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.
Continue reading Iphostrou & Iphostrou and Ors
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Iphostrou & Iphostrou and Ors [2011] FamCA 20
Case
[2011] FamCA 20
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of *Iphostrou & Iphostrou and Ors*, the Honourable Justice Cronin considered an application by the wife for interim orders relating to litigation funding. The dispute concerned the wife's need for financial assistance to meet her legal costs and disbursements in the ongoing proceedings.
The court was required to determine whether to grant interim orders for litigation funding to the wife, and if so, the terms upon which such funding should be provided. Specifically, the court had to consider how payments made by the husband for his own legal expenses should be managed to ensure the wife's solicitors received funds to cover her costs.
Justice Cronin reasoned that a mechanism was necessary to ensure the wife's legal costs were met while the proceedings were ongoing. The court ordered that within seven days of the husband paying his solicitors for expenses related to his case, he must pay an equivalent sum to the wife's solicitors. The husband's solicitors were to hold any funds received from him in trust, not to be applied until the wife's solicitors had received the same amount. If the husband failed to make the payment to the wife's solicitors within seven days, he was to direct his own solicitors to pay 50 per cent of the funds held in trust to the wife's solicitors. These payments were to be applied by the wife's solicitors towards her costs and disbursements. The court also noted that the categorisation of these payments would be a matter for the trial judge.
Ultimately, the wife's application for interim orders relating to litigation funding was otherwise dismissed, with the specific orders detailed above being made.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
That within seven (7) days after the payment by or on behalf of the husband of any money in payment of accounts rendered by his solicitors including in relation to expenses associated with the preparation of his case, the husband pay or cause to be paid the same sum of money to the solicitors for the wife.
2.
That within 24 hours after the payment by or on behalf of the husband of any money referred to in paragraph (1) of these orders, the husband cause to be given to the wife’s solicitors, a memorandum stating the amount or amounts so paid to the solicitors.
3.
That all money paid to the solicitors for the husband including on his behalf arising out of paragraph (1) of these orders shall be held in trust by the solicitors for the husband and not applied in payment until such time as the same amount has been paid by or on behalf of the husband to the solicitors for the wife.
4.
In the event that the payment referred to in paragraph (3) is not made within seven (7) days thereafter, the husband is to direct his solicitors to pay 50 per cent of whatever is received and held by them in trust, to the solicitors for the wife.
5.
That the amounts paid pursuant to these orders to the solicitors for the wife are to be applied by them in payment of the costs and disbursements incurred by the wife in the conduct of these proceedings.
6.
That the question of the categorisation of any payments made pursuant to these orders shall be matters for determination by the trial judge.
7.
That the wife’s application for interim orders relating to litigation funding be otherwise dismissed.