Jepson and Jepson and Ors

The parties involved were the Plaintiff (husband) and the First Defendant (wife), along with additional respondents K Pty Limited, Ms B Jepson, and C Firm. The dispute concerned the sale of a property located at L Street, Suburb P, New South Wales. The court was required to determine the terms and conditions under which the property would be sold, varying previous orders made by the Supreme Court of NSW.

The central legal issues before the court were how to facilitate the sale of the Suburb P property, including the appointment of a real estate agent, the listing price, the acceptance of offers, and the process for auctioning the property if it did not sell by private treaty. The court also considered the powers and limitations of the Receivers appointed to manage the sale, and the co-operation required from the Plaintiff and First Defendant.

Loughnan J reasoned that the Receivers should have broad powers to effect the sale, akin to those of a registered proprietor, subject to specific limitations. The court applied principles of co-operation between the parties, outlining a detailed process for selecting an agent and setting prices. It established a mechanism for accepting offers within a certain percentage of the listing price, and a structured approach to auctioning the property if it remained unsold, including provisions for reserve prices and successive auctions. The court also addressed the scenario where a party refused to sign necessary documents, empowering the Receivers to act or allowing for an application under section 106A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth).

The court made orders varying the previous Supreme Court orders, granting the Receivers power to sell the Suburb P property. These orders included specific provisions for the appointment of a real estate agent, a listing price of $6.1 million, and conditions for accepting offers and proceeding to auction. The court also noted an undertaking by Ms B Jepson to cover insurance costs for the property and excused the Receivers from paying outgoings and marketing expenses, based on this undertaking. The application by the Receivers filed on 19 October 2017 was dismissed, and no orders were made regarding the wife's separate orders, except as already provided. Leave was granted for any party affected by the orders to apply on seven days' notice.