Pearson & Coli

The Full Court of the Family Court of Australia considered an appeal by the wife concerning final property orders made by consent by a Registrar. The wife sought leave to apply out of time for a review of these orders, which were found to be uncertain and incapable of enforcement, and she no longer consented to them. The wife also sought interim orders for a partial property settlement of $400,000 to fund litigation.

The primary legal issues before the Full Court were whether to grant the wife leave to apply out of time for a review of the Registrar's consent orders, and if so, whether to set aside those orders. Additionally, the Court had to determine if it was just and equitable to make interim orders for a partial property settlement, given the parties' substantial assets and the husband's significantly higher income.

The Full Court reasoned that the uncertainty and unenforceability of the Registrar's consent orders, coupled with the wife's withdrawal of consent, justified setting them aside. The Court also found that, given the parties' financial positions and the scope for such an order, it was just and equitable to grant the wife's application for a partial property settlement of $400,000. This payment was to be treated as an asset of the wife for future final property adjustment.

The Court ordered that the Registrar's consent orders of 26 May 2014 be set aside. The husband was ordered to pay the wife $400,000 by 22 April 2019. Provisions were made for the wife to repay this sum to the husband if her property settlement application was dismissed, with default provisions allowing for the sale of the Suburb TT property to satisfy any outstanding repayment. The wife's application filed on 16 November 2018 was otherwise dismissed.