Rahman v Rahman

In the matter of Rahman v Rahman, the Family Court of Australia is confronted with a complex dispute involving the management and sale of jointly owned matrimonial properties. The parties, Mr. and Mrs. Rahman, are embroiled in a continuing conflict following the court's appointment of Mrs. Rahman as trustee for the sale of two properties in March 2023. By November 2024, neither property has been sold, with Mrs. Rahman occupying one of the properties and attempting to sell the other, while their daughter claims to have purchased it. Adding to the complexity, Mr. Rahman has placed caveats on the titles of the properties, and Mrs. Rahman holds an apprehended violence order (AVO) against him. The court is tasked with deciding whether Mrs. Rahman should be removed as trustee for sale, whether Mr. Rahman should be appointed in her place, and whether independent trustees should be appointed instead.

The central legal issues before the court revolve around the proper administration of the trust for sale, the appropriateness of Mrs. Rahman's continued role as trustee given the ongoing conflict, and the implications of Mr. Rahman's conduct in placing caveats on the properties. Additionally, the court must consider Mr. Rahman's application for the judge's disqualification due to alleged apprehended bias, arguing that the judge's conduct in previous proceedings might lead a fair-minded lay observer to doubt the judge's impartiality.

The court's reasoning centres on the need for an impartial and effective administration of the trust for sale, particularly in the context of the ongoing conflict between the parties. The court acknowledges the importance of ensuring that the trustee can carry out their duties without undue interference or conflict of interest. While considering Mr. Rahman's application for the judge's disqualification, the court examines the judge's conduct in detail, ultimately concluding that there is no basis for the apprehension of bias. The court finds that Mrs. Rahman's continued role as trustee is not conducive to the efficient sale of the properties due to the persistent conflict, and therefore, orders that independent trustees be appointed for the sale of the properties. The court dismisses Mr. Rahman's application for disqualification, reaffirming its commitment to impartiality and the fair resolution of the dispute.

In summary, the court orders the removal of Mrs. Rahman as trustee for sale of the matrimonial properties and the appointment of independent trustees. The court also dismisses the application for the judge's disqualification, finding no basis for apprehended bias. The orders are designed to ensure the properties are sold efficiently and without further conflict.