Mullen & Acken (No 3) (Interim property settlement; Directions for trial)

In the matter of *Mullen & Acken (No 3)*, Bennett J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the husband, Mr Acken, for interim property settlement and for orders relating to the children's passports. The wife, Ms Mullen, did not attend court or file any documents in response to the husband's application, leading the court to proceed on an undefended basis. The husband sought the sale of the former matrimonial home to provide each party with $100,000 by way of interim property settlement, and also sought permission for the children to obtain Australian passports to travel overseas, as the wife had not signed the passport application forms.

The court was required to determine whether to grant the husband's application for interim property settlement, including the sale of the former matrimonial home and the distribution of proceeds, and whether to issue orders permitting the children to obtain Australian passports and to travel internationally without the wife's consent. Additionally, the court needed to establish directions for the final hearing, given the wife's non-participation in the current proceedings.

Applying the provisions of the *Passports Act 1938* (Cth), the court was satisfied that it was not practicable to obtain the wife's consent for the children's passports and therefore permitted the husband to apply for them, allowing the children to leave Australia notwithstanding the wife's lack of signature. The court also ordered the sale of the former matrimonial home by public auction or private sale, setting a reserve price and outlining the process for engaging real estate agents and conveyancers. The proceeds were to be applied towards sale costs, a refund to the husband for preparation expenses, and then equally between the parties, with each to receive $100,000 as an interim distribution. The court also made extensive directions for the final hearing, including the filing of financial statements, evidence, case outlines, and the provision of information by the independent children's lawyer, noting that failure to participate could result in the court proceeding without further input from the non-participating party.