LEITH & LEITH

In the matter of *Leith & Leith*, Judge Harman of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the wife for urgent ex parte orders to preserve matrimonial assets. The wife sought to restrain the husband from dealing with certain bank accounts and to suspend his access to internet banking facilities. The dispute arose in the context of property settlement proceedings, where the wife contended that providing the husband with prior notice of the orders sought would render her application nugatory, as he might dissipate the assets.

The court was required to determine whether to grant ex parte injunctions restraining the husband from dealing with specified bank accounts and directing a third-party bank to suspend the husband's internet banking access. This involved considering the legal threshold for granting such orders without notice to the other party, particularly in the context of preserving assets in family law proceedings. The court also had to assess whether the proposed orders were reasonably necessary and appropriate for the preservation of matrimonial assets and for achieving an equitable division of property.

Judge Harman applied principles relating to the preservation of matrimonial assets and the court's power to make orders ex parte under sections 90AE(2) and 114(3) of the *Family Law Act 1975*. The court was satisfied that the orders were reasonably necessary and appropriate to preserve the matrimonial assets and facilitate an appropriate division. Procedural fairness was considered to have been afforded to the bank, and the orders were deemed just and equitable. The court also ensured that the bank's administrative costs incurred in complying with the orders were provided for.

The court made orders directing the bank to suspend the husband's internet banking access and to ensure no person could operate the specified accounts, thereby preserving their current balances. The husband was also restrained from dealing with or reducing the balance of any account in which he had an interest, with an exception for a specified business account. The proceedings were adjourned for further mention, and directions were given for the service of documents on the husband and the bank, as well as for the husband to file a response. The wife had provided an undertaking as to damages.