Ravalli and Ravalli

In the matter of *Ravalli and Ravalli*, Foster J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the wife seeking to strike out the husband's response and for the disqualification of the husband. The dispute concerned the execution of court orders made on 1 December 2017, particularly concerning the transfer of property and the discharge of a mortgage.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the husband's response should be struck out and dismissed, and whether the husband should be disqualified from acting in the proceedings. The court was also required to determine the appropriate means to give effect to its previous orders, including the transfer of a specific property and the discharge of a mortgage, in circumstances where the husband appeared to be obstructing their implementation.

Foster J reasoned that the husband's conduct had led to a failure to comply with the court's orders, necessitating the appointment of a Registrar to execute the necessary documents pursuant to section 106A of the *Family Law Act 1975*. The court found that the husband's response was without merit and ordered it to be struck out and dismissed. The oral application for disqualification was also dismissed. The court further made orders regarding the payment of costs by the husband to the wife, including costs related to the removal of the husband's possessions from the property and costs fixed from a previous order. Finally, the court directed the net balance of funds payable to the husband to be paid to the Registrar of the Family Court for subsequent payment to the husband.