Magnus & Sandri (No 3)

In the case of Magnus & Sandri (No 3), the husband, Mr Sandri, sought leave to reopen the final hearing of the property proceedings between him and his wife, Ms Magnus, following the conclusion of the final hearing. The application was made the day before the final judgment was listed for delivery. The husband sought to make changes to the balance sheet, including the inclusion of further tax liabilities, and sought amendments to the proposed final orders. The wife opposed the application on the grounds that the husband’s evidence did not demonstrate a material change in circumstances, and that she would suffer prejudice if the application was granted.

The court had to decide whether the application to reopen the final hearing should be granted, and whether the husband’s application to discharge interlocutory orders should be successful. The husband argued that he had experienced a change in circumstance that materially impacted his earning capacity and that he was unable to satisfy his ongoing financial obligations required by the interim orders. The court found that the husband had not demonstrated a material change in circumstances, and that the additional tax liabilities sought to be included ought to have been reasonably anticipated at the final hearing. The court also found that the evidence of the circumstances impacting the husband’s earning capacity was before the Court at the final hearing.

The court held that the husband’s application to reopen the final hearing was antithetical to the overarching purpose and the interests of justice. The court found that the husband had not provided a sufficient explanation for not calling the evidence-in-chief at the final hearing, and that the wife would suffer prejudice if the application was granted. The court also found that the husband had not demonstrated a material change in circumstances, and that the orders seeking a superannuation split were open to the parties to advance at the final hearing. The court dismissed the husband’s application to reopen the final hearing and to discharge the interlocutory orders.

The court ordered that the husband pay the wife’s costs of the application in a proceeding filed on 3 July 2024, as agreed or assessed in accordance with the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).