Reua & Reua and Anor

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

REUA & REUA AND ANOR [2008] FamCA 1038

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY SETTLEMENT – Bankruptcy of one party

APPLICANT: Ms Reua

FIRST RESPONDENT:	Mr Reua
SECOND RESPONDENT:	Mr Roper

FILE NUMBER: PAF 950 of 2006

DATE DELIVERED: 4 September 2008

PLACE DELIVERED: Parramatta

PLACE HEARD: Parramatta

JUDGMENT OF: STEVENSON J

HEARING DATE: 30 June 2008, 1 July 2008

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Jamieson

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Thomas Booler & Co

COUNSEL FOR THE FIRST RESPONDENT: Mr Schroder

SOLICITOR FOR THE FIRST RESPONDENT: Coleman & Greig

COUNSEL FOR THE SECOND RESPONDENT: Ms Rees

SOLICITOR FOR THE SECOND RESPONDENT: Farrer Gesini & Dunn

Orders

1. That the Trustee and the wife forthwith do all things necessary to effect and complete the sale of the following properties:

   C Street

   T Street

   G Street

   in the State of New South Wales

2. That the Trustee and the wife cause the net proceeds of such sales, after payment out of secured debts and selling costs to be distributed:

   2.1as to 50% to the Trustee and

   2.2the balance to the wife

3. That the Trustee and the wife do all things necessary to cause any money held on trust, pending the completion of these proceedings, to be paid as to 50% to the Trustee and the balance to the wife.

4. That the wife pay to the husband the sum of $118,892 within 28 days of receipt by her of all money due to her pursuant to order 2. 

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Reua & Reua and Anor is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT PARRAMATTA

FILE NUMBER: PAF 950  of 2006

MS REUA

Applicant

And

MR REUA

First Respondent

MR ROPER

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

THE PROCEEDINGS

1. These proceedings are for settlement of property. The applicant is the wife, Ms Reua.  The respondents are the husband, Mr Reua and his trustee in bankruptcy, Mr Roper (‘the Trustee’). 

2. It was agreed that the Trustee and the wife each hold property to the value of $319,692.  Further, it was common ground that unsecured creditors in the bankrupt estate of the husband are owed approximately $233,860, with contingent unsecured creditors asserting claims totalling $847,380.

3. The wife sought orders to the effect that she retain all the property which she holds and that she take all assets which are currently vested in the Trustee.  The result would be that the wife would take all available property.  The husband and the Trustee would receive nothing, which would mean that none of the unsecured debts would be paid. 

4. In final submissions, counsel for the husband indicated that he sought orders for an equal division of the non-vested property between himself and the wife.  The Trustee would attend to payment of the unsecured creditors from the property vested in him.  The Trustee sought orders to the effect that he and the wife each retain the property which is currently vested…