Panshin and Farmer
[2013] FMCAfam 96
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| PANSHIN & FARMER | [2013] FMCAfam 96 |
| FAMILY LAW – Property – application in a case for “urgent property funds access” orders. |
| Family Law Act 1975 |
| Applicant: | MS PANSHIN |
| Respondent: | MS FARMER |
| File Number: | SYC 2252 of 2011 |
| Judgment of: | Altobelli FM |
| Hearing date: | 22 January 2013 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 22 January 2013 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 7 February 2013 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | In person |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | No appearance |
ORDERS
Ms Farmer do all things necessary to forthwith pay to Ms Panshin and to herself the sum of $20,000.00 each from the sale proceeds of the property being Property C with the characterisation of this payment to be determined at the Final Hearing.
The matter be stood over to 15 February 2013 at 10am for Final Hearing.
Leave be granted to Ms Farmer to apply to my Associate to relist this matter before me on 7 days notice.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Panshin & Farmer is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYC 2252 of 2011
| MS PANSHIN |
Applicant
And
| MS FARMER |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
This matter came before me on 22 January 2013. I granted leave to relist on short notice an application by Ms Panshin dealing with “urgent property funds access” (Ms Panshin’s email to my Associate on 4 January 2013). Pursuant to that leave Ms Panshin filed an Application in a Case on 15 January 2013 supported by an affidavit sworn 14 January 2013. It was listed before me at 9:00am. The Application in a Case purports to seek 25 orders only a few of which could be characterised as relating to “urgent property funds access”.
On 22 January 2013 I made the following orders:
(1)
Ms Farmer do all things necessary to forthwith pay to
Ms Panshin and to herself the sum of $20,000.00 each from the sale proceeds of the property being Property C with the characterisation of this payment to be determined at the Final Hearing.
(2)The matter be stood over to 15 February 2013 at 10am for Final Hearing.
(3)Leave be granted to Ms Farmer to apply to my Associate to relist this matter before me on 7 days notice.
Those reasons explain why I made those orders. The substantive application is part-heard before me. Evidence was given on 5 and 6 July 2013. The final day of hearing is listed for 15 February 2013, just over 3 weeks after the date the matter came before me.
I explained to Ms Panshin that I was only prepared to deal with urgent matters relating to her need for funds from the sale proceeds of the home at [C]. The other matters could await the final hearing and could, in any event, be addressed without judicial intervention. I explained to Ms Panshin that I had only limited time available to deal with her application because of the pressure of other cases.
I was satisfied that Ms Panshin had taken all reasonable steps to notify the other party in this case about her application.
I was satisfied that Ms Panshin was in urgent need of funds to deal with housing and motor vehicle problems that she was facing.
I was satisfied that there would be no prejudice to the other party because she would receive a similar amount in accordance with the orders proposed by Ms Panshin.
I was satisfied that there was a high likelihood that there would be funds from the sale proceeds with which to make just and equitable orders altering property interests under the Family Law Act 1975.
I reserved the issue of characterisation of the payment to the final hearing. Given the urgency of the application this is not an issue that needs to be determined now. Whether it is an interim property order, interim maintenance order, injunction or anything else, I was satisfied the grounds existed and this would be best determined at a final hearing.
I accept that what the court does not know is whether settlement of the sale of the [C] property has in fact occurred. Whether or not it has, these orders are to apply as soon as funds are available from the sale proceeds.
The rest of the application can be dealt with on 15 February 2013.
I certify that the preceding eleven (11) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Altobelli FM
Date: 7 February 2013
0
0