Rickert and Rickert (No 2)
Case
•
[2020] FamCA 841
•6 October 2020
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Rickert and Rickert (No 2) [2020] FamCA 841
[2020] FamCA 841
6 October 2020
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In this matter before McClelland DCJ, the applicant husband sought interim orders for the discharge of previous consent orders relating to child support and spousal maintenance, as well as an interim order for a partial property distribution. The husband had failed to comply with his child support obligations since November 2019, accumulating arrears of $40,000 in school fees. He also sought to discharge spousal maintenance orders requiring him to pay the rates and insurance for the former matrimonial home. The wife opposed these applications and sought costs on an indemnity basis.
The court was required to determine whether the circumstances had changed sufficiently to warrant the discharge of the existing consent orders for spousal maintenance, and whether an interim order for the sale of the former matrimonial home was in the interests of justice. Additionally, the court needed to consider the husband's failure to serve the Child Support Registrar with his application and the appropriate basis for awarding costs.
Regarding spousal maintenance, the court applied the principles from *Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Limited v Philip Morris Incorporated* and *Cutler v Wandsworth Stadium Limited*, holding that the onus was on the husband to establish changed circumstances by evidence. The court found that the husband had not discharged this onus, noting that the wife's ability to access funds for legal fees did not necessarily indicate a readily available financial resource for her own needs, as per the principles in *Hall v Hall*. The application for interim property distribution was dismissed as the court was not satisfied it was in the interests of justice, particularly given the final hearing was scheduled within three months. The husband's application for interim orders was largely dismissed, with the exception of the child support aspect concerning the discharge of orders, which was adjourned to the first day of the final hearing. The court ordered the husband to pay the wife's costs on a party/party basis in a fixed lump sum, to be paid from his share of the property following the final property orders.
The court was required to determine whether the circumstances had changed sufficiently to warrant the discharge of the existing consent orders for spousal maintenance, and whether an interim order for the sale of the former matrimonial home was in the interests of justice. Additionally, the court needed to consider the husband's failure to serve the Child Support Registrar with his application and the appropriate basis for awarding costs.
Regarding spousal maintenance, the court applied the principles from *Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Limited v Philip Morris Incorporated* and *Cutler v Wandsworth Stadium Limited*, holding that the onus was on the husband to establish changed circumstances by evidence. The court found that the husband had not discharged this onus, noting that the wife's ability to access funds for legal fees did not necessarily indicate a readily available financial resource for her own needs, as per the principles in *Hall v Hall*. The application for interim property distribution was dismissed as the court was not satisfied it was in the interests of justice, particularly given the final hearing was scheduled within three months. The husband's application for interim orders was largely dismissed, with the exception of the child support aspect concerning the discharge of orders, which was adjourned to the first day of the final hearing. The court ordered the husband to pay the wife's costs on a party/party basis in a fixed lump sum, to be paid from his share of the property following the final property orders.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Consent
-
Costs
-
Remedies
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Cardus and Lavrick (No 2) [2020] FamCA 1103
Cases Cited
17
Statutory Material Cited
5
Bass & Bass and Anor
[2014] FamCA 1000
Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Philip Morris Inc
[1981] HCA 39
Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Philip Morris Inc
[1981] HCA 39