MCGAREY & STANCATI

In the matter of *MCGAREY & STANCATI*, heard before McClelland J of the Family Court of Australia, the parties sought a variation of existing property settlement orders. The dispute concerned the quantum of a specific financial obligation previously ordered between the parties.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to vary the existing orders pursuant to section 79A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This involved determining if there were sufficient grounds to alter the financial outcome previously determined by Justice Rees. A secondary issue arose regarding the enforcement of any varied orders, specifically concerning the execution of necessary legal documents.

McClelland J considered the application for variation under section 79A, which allows for the alteration of property settlement orders in certain circumstances, such as where there has been a miscarriage of justice. The Court's reasoning, as reflected in the orders, involved a significant reduction in a previously ordered sum, from $58,000 to $10,500. This suggests the Court found grounds to vary the original orders, likely due to factors that rendered the initial order unjust. To ensure compliance with the varied orders, the Court also made provision under section 106A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), appointing the Registrar of the Family Court to execute any necessary deeds or instruments on behalf of a defaulting party.

The Court ordered that the amount of $58,000 be deleted from the orders of 22 May 2013 and replaced with $10,500. Furthermore, the Registrar of the Family Court of Australia at Sydney was appointed to execute any deeds or instruments in the name of a defaulting party should they refuse or neglect to do so, to give full effect to the varied orders.