Rametta and Rametta & Ors

In *Rametta and Rametta & Ors*, the wife sought to set aside a final property order made by consent in 2007, or alternatively, an extension of time to review a registrar's decision to make that order. The proceedings also involved issues concerning the qualification of evidence regarding value or quantity, and the costs associated with affidavits that were struck out. The matter came before Bennett J.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to vary the 2007 consent orders pursuant to section 79A(1A) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This involved considering the wife's application to set aside or extend time to review the original property order, and the appropriate disposition of certain real property. The court also had to determine the costs of the proceedings, including the costs related to inadmissible material.

Bennett J made orders by consent, discharging all extant orders except for a costs order made on 22 June 2020. Crucially, pursuant to section 79A(1A) of the Act, the court varied the 2007 orders to transfer a property known as Location K to the Respondent Husband. The wife was ordered to execute all necessary documents for this transfer at the husband's expense, and the husband was to assume liability for all outgoings thereafter. The court also made orders restraining the wife from encumbering Location K pending the transfer and appointed a registrar to execute documents if the wife failed to do so. All extant applications were dismissed, and each party was to bear their own costs. The parties intended these orders to finally determine their financial relationship.