Monaghan and Farrer
Case
•
[2018] FamCA 178
•14 February 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Monaghan and Farrer [2018] FamCA 178
[2018] FamCA 178
14 February 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The proceedings before Austin J involved an application by the applicant, Monaghan, against the respondent, Farrer. The dispute concerned applications for interim relief and de facto spousal maintenance.
The court was required to determine whether to grant the applicant's application filed on 10 March 2017, and to consider applications for interim relief filed on 8 February 2017 and 24 January 2018. Additionally, the court had to decide on an oral application for costs made by Ms B and C Pty Ltd against the applicant, and to make orders regarding de facto spousal maintenance.
Austin J dismissed the applicant's application filed on 10 March 2017 and the oral application for costs. However, the court ordered the respondent to pay the applicant $750 per week by way of de facto spousal maintenance until the finalisation of proceedings, with specific payment details provided. The court also dismissed the applications for interim relief set out in the initiating application and the response, as well as all other outstanding applications for interim relief. By consent, no order was made as to costs between the applicant and respondent concerning the interim hearing.
The court was required to determine whether to grant the applicant's application filed on 10 March 2017, and to consider applications for interim relief filed on 8 February 2017 and 24 January 2018. Additionally, the court had to decide on an oral application for costs made by Ms B and C Pty Ltd against the applicant, and to make orders regarding de facto spousal maintenance.
Austin J dismissed the applicant's application filed on 10 March 2017 and the oral application for costs. However, the court ordered the respondent to pay the applicant $750 per week by way of de facto spousal maintenance until the finalisation of proceedings, with specific payment details provided. The court also dismissed the applications for interim relief set out in the initiating application and the response, as well as all other outstanding applications for interim relief. By consent, no order was made as to costs between the applicant and respondent concerning the interim hearing.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Injunction
-
Consent
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Monaghan and Farrer [2018] FamCA 178
Most Recent Citation
Hanas & Jolaha (No. 4) [2019] FamCA 483
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
1