Robinson and Shelter (No 3)

In the matter of *Robinson and Shelter (No 3)*, Young J of the Family Court of Australia made orders concerning the distribution of funds from the sale of a Queensland property and the procedural steps leading to a defended hearing. The dispute involved the wife's legal costs and ongoing legal expenses, as well as the husband's disclosure obligations.

The court was required to determine how the net proceeds of the Queensland property should be disbursed, specifically addressing the payment of $30,000 to the wife's solicitors, MacGregor, Barristers & Solicitors, to be held on trust pending a determination of their costs and disbursements. The court also needed to consider the wife's access to a portion of the remaining proceeds for her ongoing legal costs and disbursements, to be held by her present solicitor, Mr Shenken, on trust. Furthermore, the court was to set timelines for the parties to file and serve amended applications, trial affidavits, witness affidavits, and updated financial statements, and to ensure the husband's personal attendance at a defended hearing.

Young J ordered that the balance of monies from the sale of the Queensland property be paid to Mr Shenken's trust account, pending further court order. The solicitors acting on the conveyance were directed to disburse the net proceeds by first paying $30,000 to MacGregor, Barristers & Solicitors on trust, and then paying the balance to Mr Shenken on trust. Mr Shenken was authorised to access up to $30,000 from these monies as security for costs and for the wife's ongoing legal expenses, with all such monies to be considered and categorised in the section 79 proceedings. The court also mandated full disclosure of the husband's assets and income by a specified date, and required him to provide original documents evidencing alleged liabilities. Timelines were set for the filing and service of trial documents by both parties, and the husband was directed to personally attend a defended hearing scheduled for March 2010. The matter was listed for case management, and liberty was reserved to the conveyancing solicitors to apply to the court regarding any adverse impact from these orders.