Paulus and Scillaci

In *Paulus and Scillaci*, heard by Cronin J, the wife sought to enforce an order made on 1 June 2017, specifically order 2(i) which concerned the seizure and delivery of a chandelier. The application was filed on 30 August 2017, and the wife sought to proceed without notice to the respondent husband.

The court was required to determine whether to grant the wife's application to enforce the previous final order concerning the chandelier. This involved considering the appropriate procedural mechanisms under the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) for the seizure and delivery of property, and whether to appoint an enforcement officer for this purpose. The court also had to consider the wife's application for costs.

Cronin J applied rules 20.53, 20.55, and 20.56 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) and section 38P of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). The court ordered that the application proceed without notice to the husband. It further ordered the enforcement of the previous order by a warrant authorising an enforcement officer to seize and deliver the chandelier to the wife. The Marshall/Sheriff or their delegate was appointed as the enforcement officer, with the warrant granting broad powers to enter, search, secure, and remove the property, if necessary by force, across all Australian states and territories. The husband was ordered to pay the wife's costs of the application, fixed at $7,495, and the application was otherwise dismissed.