JACOBSEN & JACOBSEN

In the matter of *Jacobsen & Jacobsen*, Loughnan J of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia considered applications by both the husband and wife to vary or enforce existing interim orders concerning their property and parenting arrangements. The dispute involved complex property matters where some of the orders sought by the parties aimed to relitigate issues already determined, while others were deemed more appropriate for resolution at a final hearing.

The court was required to determine whether to vary or enforce the existing interim property orders, and whether to vary the interim parenting orders. Specifically, the husband sought an increase in his time with one of the children, an application opposed by the mother and not supported by the Independent Children’s Lawyer. The court also had to consider agreed arrangements regarding expert valuations of the parties' property.

Regarding the parenting application, Loughnan J dismissed the husband's request to vary the interim parenting orders. The court found that the existing arrangements were functioning well and that there was no demonstrable change in circumstances to warrant a variation. In relation to the property matters, the court made orders to enforce or facilitate some of the existing interim orders, while dismissing other applications as either already determined or to be resolved at a final hearing.

By consent, further orders were made concerning the children's education, specifically regarding applications for high school placements for their child, Y. These consent orders detailed the responsibilities of each party in securing a place at either H School or N School, including financial obligations and indemnities in the event of non-attendance at the chosen school.