PELTON & BANBURY

In *Pelton & Banbury* [2018] FamCA 1172, the Family Court of Australia considered interim consent orders relating to property discovery and the appointment of experts in a property settlement and parenting matter. The parties, Ms Pelton (Applicant) and Mr Banbury (Respondent), had reached an agreement on these procedural matters, with the husband agreeing to pay the wife's costs for the day. The court also noted that parenting proceedings had been adjourned, pending an investigation into significant allegations of child abuse made by the husband.

The primary legal issues before the court were the terms of the consent orders concerning financial disclosure and the appointment of single experts to value various assets, including companies, trusts, superannuation funds, real properties, chattels, a wine collection, and vehicles. Additionally, the court had to consider the implications of the husband's Notice of Child Abuse on the interim parenting arrangements, particularly in light of the need for investigation before any assessment of the children's best interests could be made.

Justice Macmillan made orders by consent, detailing the extensive financial documents to be provided by the husband within 14 days, including bank statements, investment and share documents, tax returns, and information relating to companies and trusts in which he held an interest. The parties were also ordered to instruct their solicitors to appoint single experts for valuations of specific assets and property. The court also imposed an injunction restraining the parties from dealing with the assets of the "Banbury/Pelton Group" other than in the ordinary course of business, and ordered that funds previously withdrawn by each party be retained. The court further ordered that joint bank accounts and certain company accounts be frozen, with specific exceptions.

The court adjourned all extant applications to a date to be fixed by the Registrar, noting that the Notice of Child Abuse would be brought to the Registrar's attention for the necessary investigation and subsequent relisting of the parenting applications. The husband was ordered to pay the wife's costs of the day, fixed at $2,431. The wife reserved her right to argue that the husband had appropriated more than $600,000 upon receiving full disclosure.