Ritchie and Scammell

In *Ritchie and Scammell*, heard by Judge Phipps, the applicant sought to enforce a binding financial agreement and a subsequent court order. The dispute concerned the respondent's liability to pay a sum of money to the applicant, as well as the ownership of certain assets.

The court was required to determine the extent of the respondent's financial obligations to the applicant under the existing agreement and order, and to clarify the ownership of a motorcycle and a Holden vehicle. Furthermore, the court needed to consider the implications of potential third-party interests in a Ford sedan for the enforcement of any warrant.

Judge Phipps declared that the respondent was liable to pay the applicant $83,599.47, plus interest on a portion of that sum from 18 January 2016. The court also declared the respondent to be the owner of the specified motorcycle and Holden. In relation to the Ford sedan, the court directed that any affidavit supporting an enforcement warrant must disclose that the respondent's brother and son may have an interest in that vehicle. The respondent was ordered to pay the applicant's costs, fixed at $7,120, with liberty for either party to apply to vary this amount within 21 days.