Kelly and Lomax

[2014] FamCA 431

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

KELLY & LOMAX [2014] FamCA 431

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Interim application – Disclosure –  Where the wife seeks an order that the husband disclose further documents – When relevant documents relate to corporations for which the husband was a director – When the husband is no longer a director – When the wife has made previous applications in relation to disclosure – Where previous applications were denied – Whether the husband can be compelled to seek additional documents from these corporations – When the Corporations Act2001 (Cth) provides that a director has a right to access documents for seven years for the purpose of litigation – When the litigation does not relate to the husband’s position as a director – Where the application is denied.

FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Interim application – Where the wife seeks interim spousal maintenance – Where the wife is not currently employed – Where the wife asserts that unemployment is sufficient to justify maintenance – Where previous applications for maintenance have been denied.

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 9, 198F, 1303.
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 72.

Angus & Petrino [2013] FamCA 817.
Archer Capital 4A Pty Ltd v Sage Group plc [2013] FCA 1029.
Dick v Alan Powell Holdings Pty Ltd [2009] QSC 184.
Hardcastle v Advanced Mining Technologies Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 1846.
Nyles & Nyles [2010] FamCA 1232.
Stern v Sekers [2010] NSWSC 59.
Weir and Weir (1993) FLC 92-338.

APPLICANT: Ms Kelly

RESPONDENT: Mr Lomax

FILE NUMBER: BRC 6009 of 2010

DATE DELIVERED: 23 June 2014

PLACE DELIVERED: Brisbane

PLACE HEARD: Brisbane

JUDGMENT OF: Hogan  J

HEARING DATE: 3 and 27 February and 26  May 2014

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Baston by way of direct access brief

FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Lomax in person

Orders

1. All outstanding Interim Applications are dismissed.

2. Any application for costs arising out of the Interim Applications filed 29 January 2014 and 22 May 2014 are adjourned to the trial judge.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Kelly & Lomax has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT

FILE NUMBER: BRC 6009  of 2010

Ms Kelly

And

Mr Lomax

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Application that Mr Lomax obtain documents from corporate entities for which he was previously a director  

1. By Clauses 2 and 3 of an Application in a Case filed 29 January 2014, Ms Kelly, for convenience referred to as (“the wife”) seeks an Order that Mr Lomax, for convenience referred to as (“the husband”) “make, file and serve an affidavit of documents including but not limited to those documents set out in Schedule A attached to these Orders”; and that he “make available for inspection and copying for by [the wife] and her lawyers those documents disclosed by him in accordance with Order…