Moretti and Moretti & Anor

The Family Court of Australia, in the matter of *Moretti & Moretti*, considered an application by the B Organisation (the intervener) seeking orders to sell properties to address longstanding breaches of a planning permit and subsequent Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) orders. The dispute involved Ms Moretti (the applicant) and Mr Moretti (the respondent), who had failed to comply with VCAT orders requiring the removal of combustible material from their properties. The intervener sought to enforce these VCAT orders through the sale of three specified properties.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether it had the accrued jurisdiction to make the orders sought by the intervener, and if so, whether those orders were appropriate to remedy the parties' non-compliance with the VCAT orders. The court also considered applications made by the wife and the husband, which sought to manage the clean-up process and the sale of properties in ways that differed from the intervener's proposed orders. The wife sought the sale of a property to pay a debt to the intervener and for the court to respect agreements between other companies, while the husband sought to manage the clean-up himself and control the sale of a property.

Justice McEvoy found that both the husband and wife, along with a company controlled by them, had made only cursory attempts to comply with the VCAT orders over an extended period. The court accepted the intervener's submission that the proposed orders were the only reasonably practicable option to remedy the breaches. The court determined it had accrued jurisdiction to make the orders, as had been conceded by the parties. Consequently, the court dismissed the wife's application and the husband's response seeking interim orders.

The court ordered that the intervener be authorised to sell the properties located at C Street, Suburb D, New South Wales; E Street, Suburb D, New South Wales; and F Street, Suburb R, New South Wales. The net proceeds of these sales were to be held by the intervener's solicitors and applied towards the removal of combustible material, necessary maintenance, or the provision of a security deposit or bank guarantee in relation to the VCAT obligations. The husband and wife were also ordered to undertake the clean-up works by specified dates, notwithstanding the intervener's actions.