Pirani & Pirani (No 2)
[2023] FedCFamC1F 483
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Pirani & Pirani (No 2) [2023] FedCFamC1F 483
File number(s): SYC 3987 of 2023 Judgment of: SCHONELL J Date of judgment: 14 June 2023 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE – Where the wife sought urgent spousal maintenance pursuant to s 77 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – Where ex parte orders have been and the husband has not yet had an opportunity to respond and file material – Where the Court is satisfied that the wife is in a parlous financial position – Order made for the husband to pay a lump sum amount of $20,000, which the Court is satisfied is reasonable and the husband has capacity to pay. Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 77 Cases cited: Pirani & Pirani [2023] FedCFamC1F 463 Division: Division 1 First Instance Number of paragraphs: 21 Date of hearing: 14 June 2023 Place: Sydney Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Givney Solicitor for the Applicant: New South Lawyers Solicitor for the First Respondent: Barkus Doolan Winning The Second Respondent: Did not participate The Third Respondent: Did not participate The Fourth Respondent: Did not participate The Fifth Respondent: Did not participate The Sixth Respondent: Did not participate ORDERS
SYC 3987 of 2023 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MS PIRANI
Applicant
AND: MR PIRANI
First Respondent
B PTY LTD
Second Respondent
C PTY LTD (and others named in the Schedule)
Third Respondent
order made by:
SCHONELL J
DATE OF ORDER:
14 JUNE 2023
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The first respondent husband pay by 4.00 pm 21 June 2023 to the wife, by way of urgent spousal maintenance, the sum of $20,000 to a bank account to be nominated by the wife.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Pirani & Pirani has been approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
SCHONELL J:
The matter listed before the Court this morning is but a continuation of proceedings that first commenced on 6 June 2023 and came before the Court on 7 June 2023 when the Court made a series of ex parte orders.
The making of an ex parte order is one that should only be made in what has been variously described in the authorities as ‘exceptional’ or ‘extraordinary circumstances’. Another requirement for the making of an ex parte order is that the Court should ensure that the respondent, who has not yet been heard, is given the earliest opportunity to put before the Court their case. For that reason, having made ex parte orders on 7 June 2023, I directed that the husband and other respondents be served by midday 8 June 2023 and listed the matter before me at 9.30 am on 9 June 2023.
On 9 June 2023, there was an appearance for the husband and the other respondents. A series of orders were made providing the other respondents with an opportunity to file documents. A future listing on two separate occasions has been provided to meet those obligations; the first listing on 22 June 2023 is to meet the exigencies of the continuation of an injunction in relation to the sale of two properties that have exchanged but not yet settled, and the second listing on 30 June 2023 is the continuation or otherwise of the balance of the ex parte orders.
On 9 June 2023, the wife gave notice that she sought an urgent payment of $150,000. To give the husband an opportunity to meet that application, I adjourned the hearing of that application to this morning.
The order that the wife seeks is $150,000 payable within 7 days. She relies upon s 77 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”) as to the source of power to make that order. She relies upon the following documents:
(1)Affidavit of wife filed 5 June 2023; and
(2)Financial Statement filed 5 June 2023.
The husband’s solicitor indicated that he had not time to file documents but made various submissions and indicated that his client would pay, on a without admissions basis, a weekly sum of $4,000 pending the hearing on 30 June 2023.
Section 77 is to the following effect:
77 Urgent spousal maintenance cases
Where, in proceedings with respect to the maintenance of a party to a marriage, it appears to the court that the party is in immediate need of financial assistance, but it is not practicable in the circumstances to determine immediately what order, if any, should be made, the court may order the payment, pending the disposal of the proceedings, of such periodic sum or other sums as the court considers reasonable.
Clearly, the prerequisite to the making of an order under this section is that the Court is satisfied that the applicant is in immediate need of financial assistance but that circumstances render it not practical to actually determine what is the order that should be made. The Court is thus to consider making such order, periodic or otherwise, as it determines is reasonable.
I am satisfied in this matter that all of the prerequisites have been met. There are on foot proceedings for maintenance of the wife.
The background to the parties’ relationship is to some extent covered in my judgment delivered on 7 June 2023 (Pirani & Pirani [2023] FedCFamC1F 463), and these reasons should be read in conjunction with those reasons.
The wife’s Financial Statement identifies that she has no income. Apart from a bank account balance of $16,535, her only other asset is what is described as personal effects and jewellery, having a value of asserted by her of $700,000. Her stated expenses for her herself are said to be $16,175 per week. The notes to her Financial Statement record the following:
2.Except for $50,000 transferred from [Mr Pirani’s] Westpac debit card account ending […95] to my Westpac Savings account ending […36], on around 1 April 2023, I do not receive maintenance or child support.
…
3. I have a fuel card from [B Group]. With my regular car [Motor Vehicle 1] I used approximately $300 in fuel per week. [B Group] has seized [Motor Vehicle 1]. [B Group] has now blocked my access to the card.
There is no evidence before me that would suggest that her personal effects and jewellery are so easily disposable as to meet her immediate need for financial assistance.
On the basis of her asserted expenditure, the wife will very shortly be without funds. She has no other means to support herself or for that matter the parties’ three children for whom she has 100 per cent of their current care. Her evidence reveals that she has not worked other than for the husband. I am satisfied that she is presently unable to support herself. Her evidence reveals that the husband has recently provided her with money. In that respect, her affidavit records the following:
152.Since I April 2023, [Mr Pirani] has stopped all payments to me from [B Group] and personally from him, except for the provision of $3,000.00 cash that I received from [Mr V] on 27 May 2023.
153.On around I April2023, [Mr Pirani] transferred $100,000.00 for me and the Children's daily living expenses by deposit to account ending in […36] in exchange of me performing degrading sexual acts for him via Facetime. I had no choice but to do his bidding as he was my husband and I needed the money to take care of household expenses, myself and the Children's ongoing expenses. I had been subjected to such degrading requests on several occasions. He would withdraw the funds after I did his bidding and make new demands.
154.From past experience, I knew [Mr Pirani] would withdraw $100,000.00 from the joint account after I had done his bidding and submitted to his sexual requests, so I quickly transferred the maximum daily withdrawal of $50,000.00 to my personal account. After I had performed the sexual acts, [Mr Pirani] withdrew the remaining $50,000.00.
She gives evidence of the parties having a lifestyle that included living in a $16 million home, retaining a housekeeper and having a chauffeur drive the children to school. In relation to various motor vehicles, she says the following:
83.In 2019, [Mr Pirani] and I had two motor vehicles. [Motor Vehicle 2] and [Motor Vehicle 3] [The Motor Vehicles]. In or around January 2019, I had a conversation with [Mr Pirani]. [Mr Pirani] said words to the following effect: “I’m going to buy you a [motor vehicle].” We went to a […] car dealer in [Suburb W]. [Mr Pirani] and I negotiated the price and ordered a […] “demo” [motor vehicle] for $485,000.00. When we ordered the car, I had a further conversation with [Mr Pirani]. [Mr Pirani] said words to the following effect: “Women are dying to be in your position. You need to kiss the ground I walk on.” The day [Motor Vehicle 1] was delivered he insisted to take a photograph of me with the car. He ignored my protest that I was inappropriately dressed. […] Since that day I drove the car every day. So far as I was aware it was an indication of our success. The car was referred to in the household as “Mum’s car.” I heard [Mr Pirani] tell friends and relatives, “I bought [Ms Pirani Motor Vehicle 1].” I saw that [Mr Pirani] was proud of the car.
84.We traded in The Motor Vehicles that we owned. Other than purchasing [Motor Vehicle 1], [Mr Pirani] purchased [Motor Vehicle 4] at a cost of approximately $450,000.00 at the same time we purchased [Motor Vehicle 1]. I do not know where [Motor Vehicle 1] is at the present time.
In relation to other aspects of their lifestyle, she says the following:
108.I used the $10,000.00 that I received each month for the purchase of groceries and my personal expenses and those of the Children. There was never an issue during the course of our relationship as to the availability of funds. Without even asking, from time to time, usually at least once per week [Mr Pirani] gave me a bundle of cash of $5,000.00 or $ 10,000.00. If I ever asked for the payment of an expense [Mr Pirani] paid it either through his own account or through [B Group]. I never had to enquire about the availability of funds during the marriage. It is only since separation that I have had to put my mind on the cost of the family living expenses, and as such I can only at this stage estimate the cost of the day to day living expenses of our household as they were until the date of separation.
109.[Mr Pirani], the Children, the housekeeper and I travelled to [Country P] once or twice each year. We stayed in our apartment at [AA Town]. We always travelled business class. When staying in [Country P] we often travelled to other [countries in the region] and Europe. We also travelled within Australia for holidays. We usually travelled in business class and stayed at five star hotels and resorts.
110.I have never had a household budget. I have endeavoured to estimate what the expenses conducting the household, the expenses of the Children and myself were during the course of the marriage.
111.I have estimated in preparing my financial statement that the weekly personal expenses of the Children and myself total $33,211.00 per week. My income of nil leaves a shortfall of $33,211.00 weekly. I have had to meet that shortfall by using the $50,000.00 obtained from [Mr Pirani] on around 1 April 2023, which I have entirely spent. I have borrowed $54,000.00 from friends to assist with payment of the weekly expenses. On 10 May 2023, I lodged an application for assessment of child support. A notice of assessment has not yet been received.
112.I have attended to the grocery shopping for the family throughout cohabitation. For many years I have shopped at Coles at [Suburb BB]. I have noted my expenditure in the last few months. [Mr Pirani] has not lived with the family since February of this year. My expenditure on grocery and household items is between $1,500.00 and $2,000.00 per week.
…
117.The piano in our home cost $10,000.00.
118.When we travelled to [City CC] our accommodation costs are usually $6,000.00 per night. On our honeymoon the room cost $30,000.00 each night. I travel to attend [a fashion event] every year. I have always travelled business class. The hotel accommodation has been approximately $1,200.00 per night.
119.I dine twice per week at restaurants with those I am involved in with the [DD Organisation] and the charity that I am involved in. Usually the expenditure of those meals is $600.00.
…
123.Every school term holiday I travel with the Children and their Nanny to either Sydney, [EE Region], [Country FF], Queensland and/or [City GG]. We will fly business class. Some of the hotels we stay at include the Hilton Hotel, the Westin, Marriot Hotel […].
I am satisfied that the wife is unable to meet her needs from her own resources.
As to husband’s capacity to meet the wife’s need for immediate financial assistance, she gives evidence as follows:
146.In [early] 2023, [Mr Pirani] and I had telephone conversation where [Mr Pirani] said “I am worth 7.7 billion dollars and I can create 1.8 billion in debt, if you try to be smart I will give you all the debts, I will destroy everything if you don’t want to do what I tell you.”
147.During the course of our relationship money was never an issue. [Mr Pirani] would freely and regularly attend gambling venues such as pubs, clubs and [HH Venue] to gamble. In addition and following [Mr Pirani’s] ban from [HH Venue], [Mr Pirani] became a [VIP] member at [JJ Venue]. [Mr Pirani] had a [VIP] member card in his name and also in my name for [HH Venue]. For the majority, if not all the time [Mr Pirani] had both of our [VIP] member cards for [HH Venue] in his possession. I was not aware of the amounts gambled by [Mr Pirani] at [HH Venue] on either of our membership cards. I have recently obtained Player Activity Statement Reports issued under my name by [HH Venue] and have been made aware that [Mr Pirani] gambled large amounts at [HH Venue] often in the millions on a monthly basis, just in my name let alone his own. Examples of these large monthly amounts are as follows:
147.1. $10,016,798.58 losing $752,498.42 in the month of […];
147.2. $6,838,963.62 losing $628,759.38 in the month of […];
147.3. $6,324,965.46 losing $780,425.27 in the month of […];
147.4. $5,584,151.08 losing $496,476.47 in the month of […];
147.5. $12,168,185.16 losing $1,043,576.47 in the month of […];
147.6. $9,021,224.09 losing $597,140.36 in the month of […]; and
147.7. $1,115,719.90 losing $249,697.80 in the month of […].
The husband has clearly not been able to respond to these allegations. His solicitor says that the wife assesses her own need at $4,934 per week by the terms of the order that she seeks. He also says that the wife’s expenses in her Financial Statement include some expenses that are being met pursuant to current orders and it involves to that extent a double dip. There is some merit to that proposition. He also states that many of the expenses sought by the wife in her Financial Statement do not meet the characterisation of being an immediate financial need. There is also merit to that proposition. He submits that the Court should proceed cautiously and make orders to meet her immediate need until such time as the husband has had an opportunity to meet her application. In that respect therefore, he relies upon on the without admissions offer made by the husband of $4,000 per week. Whilst there is some merit to the submissions made by the husband’s solicitor, I note that the wife’s application is not limited to purely $4,934 per week on an interim basis but also seeks a lump sum.
I am, however, not hearing an application for interim maintenance. I am hearing an application for urgent maintenance. I am satisfied that the circumstances are urgent. The wife is without funds to meet her needs and I am satisfied that there is an immediate need for financial assistance. There is nothing in the authorities or for that matter in the Act that suggest that need should be met with a sum that is miserly or results in penury, even if it be for a short period. Clearly, the amount must be what the Court considers reasonable. Reasonableness is adjudged by the circumstances.
The order I make will provide the wife with a fund until both parties can be heard on the next occasions, namely on 30 June 2023. That is some two and a half weeks away. I am satisfied that a payment of $20,000 by the husband is an amount that in all the circumstances, having regard to the wife’s immediate parlous financial position, her need and the husband’s capacity, is a reasonable sum.
I will order the husband to make that payment by 4.00 pm 21 June 2023.
I certify that the preceding twenty-one (21) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Ex Tempore Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Schonell. Associate:
Dated: 15 June 2023
SCHEDULE OF PARTIES
SYC 3987 of 2023 Respondents
Fourth Respondent:
D1 PTY LTD
Fifth Respondent:
D2 PTY LTD
Sixth Respondent:
E PTY LTD
0