Purcell and Fitch

In *Purcell and Fitch*, heard by Judge Hartnett, the applicant husband sought to vary existing property settlement orders made on 25 August 2011, pursuant to section 79A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The dispute concerned the division of assets and the husband's compliance with previous court orders.

The court was required to determine whether the circumstances warranted a variation of the original property settlement orders. Specifically, the court had to consider the husband's application to alter the existing financial arrangements and the wife's position regarding the enforcement of the 2011 orders and the husband's alleged non-compliance.

Judge Hartnett dismissed the husband's application to vary the orders. The court ordered the husband to sell his AMP shares and pay the proceeds to the wife, and to forthwith deliver possession of a 2005 [F] motor vehicle to the wife, with ownership to be transferred within 30 days at his expense. These assets were to form part of the first payment due to the wife under the 2011 orders. The husband was also ordered to pay the wife $5,645.88 for monies gained from the sale of a [J] bonnet and for her expenses related to his non-compliance with a previous order. The wife's costs were reserved, and the husband was otherwise to perform his obligations under the 2011 orders.