Lachlan and Turner

[2012] FamCA 486

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

LACHLAN & TURNER [2012] FamCA 486

FAMILY LAW - PROPERTY – Consent to vary final orders made by the Court

Family Law Act 1975(Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Lachlan

RESPONDENT: Mr Turner

FILE NUMBER: SYC 2456 of 2011

DATE DELIVERED: 13 June 2012

PLACE DELIVERED: Sydney

PLACE HEARD: Sydney

JUDGMENT OF: Le Poer Trench J

HEARING DATE: Consent Orders

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: No Appearance

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: No Appearance

Orders

1. I order that, pursuant to section 79A(1A) of the Family Law Act 1975(Cth), the orders made as 4 and 5 on 29 June 2011 be varied, in accordance with the document marked as annexure A to the initiating application filed by the husband on 29 May 2012. 

2. I note the matter has now concluded in the Court.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Lachlan & Turner 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 SYDNEY

FILE NUMBER: SYC 2456 of 2011

Ms Lachlan

Applicant

And

Mr Turner

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. On 29 June 2011 this matter was before me and I was asked to make orders by consent which resolved the property proceedings in this court between Ms Lachlan, the applicant wife, and Mr Turner, the respondent husband.  Those orders provided inter alia for the sale of the parties’ property at P Street, Suburb H.  Order 4(a) made on that date provided for a valuer nominated by the President of the Real Property Institute of New South Wales to determine a sale price for the property, in the event of the parties being unable to agree between themselves.

2. On 23 April 2012 on the application of the parties I made an order by consent and pursuant to the slip rule, which varied order 4 (a) of the orders of 29 June 2011, by amending the name of the institution referred to in that order to the Australian Property Institute New South Wales Division.

3. The parties have clearly continued to negotiate for the purpose of implementing their original agreement and have now reach a point where the husband apparently has the ability to pay the wife the sum of $127,500 as a lump sum and a further payment of $20,000 over a four year period. That ability has given rise to an amendment to the parties’ first agreement and that amendment is embodied in terms of settlement which have been signed by each of the parties. Accordingly, the parties have jointly sought a consent order pursuant to section 79A(1A) of the Family Law Act 1975(Cth) and I am of the view that such an order should be made.

I certify that the preceding three (3) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Le Poer Trench delivered on 13 June 2012.

Associate:  

Date:  20 June 2012