Karbines and Karbines

In *Karbines and Karbines*, Dawe J of the Supreme Court of Victoria considered a dispute concerning the interpretation of a settlement agreement and its impact on a subsequent application for property adjustment orders under the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Karbines, sought to have a previous settlement agreement, which they had entered into, set aside or varied, and to obtain property adjustment orders.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the settlement agreement, which purported to finally resolve all financial matters between the parties, constituted a bar to the subsequent application for property adjustment orders under the *Family Law Act*. Specifically, the court had to determine if the agreement was a valid and binding contract that precluded the court from exercising its discretion to make further orders regarding the parties' property.

Dawe J reasoned that the settlement agreement, if valid, would operate as a bar to the application for property adjustment orders. The court examined the terms of the agreement and the circumstances surrounding its execution to ascertain whether it was a genuine attempt by the parties to achieve finality in their financial affairs. The judge applied principles of contract law, considering whether there was a meeting of the minds and whether the agreement was entered into freely and voluntarily by both parties. The court also considered the public policy implications of allowing parties to contract out of the statutory jurisdiction of the Family Court.

Ultimately, Dawe J found that the settlement agreement was a valid and binding contract that effectively resolved all financial matters between the parties. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for property adjustment orders, upholding the integrity of the settlement agreement.