Lake and Brand (No 2)

Johns J of the Federal Circuit Court considered an application by the wife to vary existing orders concerning the proceeds of sale of a property and to set aside certain instruments. The dispute involved the distribution of funds from the sale of a property at B Street, C Town, and the husband's actions in relation to his shareholding in I Pty Ltd and his directorships and role in the Mr Brand Family Trust.

The court was required to determine how the proceeds of sale of the B Street property should be applied, specifically whether a portion should be used to reduce a mortgage on another property and how the remainder should be held. Furthermore, the court had to consider whether to set aside instruments by which the husband had transferred a share in I Pty Ltd, resigned as a director of I Pty Ltd and J Pty Ltd, and resigned as a guardian and/or appointor of the Mr Brand Family Trust, pursuant to section 106B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The court also had to consider whether to restrain the husband from dealing with his shareholding or resigning from any office.

Johns J reasoned that the wife's application for variation of the property sale proceeds was justified, ordering that $170,000 be applied to reduce the mortgage on the D Street property, with the balance to be held in trust. The court found that the husband's actions in transferring his share, resigning from directorships, and resigning from his role in the family trust were done to defeat the wife's claims and were therefore voidable under section 106B of the *Family Law Act 1975*. Consequently, the court ordered that these instruments be set aside and that the husband take steps to be reinstated to his former positions and shareholding. The court also imposed an injunction restraining the husband from dealing with his shareholding or resigning from any office until further order.

The court ordered that the wife file written submissions regarding her costs application, with the husband to file any response within a specified timeframe. The wife's application filed on 4 June 2014 and the husband's response filed on 18 July 2014 were otherwise dismissed.