Romero and Chavez (No 2)

In the matter of *Romero and Chavez (No 2)*, Barry J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the husband to set aside existing consent property orders made on 23 October 2008. The original orders stipulated that the wife would retain the former matrimonial home and assume liability for the associated mortgage and all creditors, with the exception of an unresolved debt to the Australian Taxation Office. The husband also sought to have three separate contravention applications filed by the wife dismissed.

The court was required to determine whether there were substantial and significant circumstances justifying the setting aside of the consent property orders under section 79A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Additionally, the court needed to consider the wife's contravention applications.

Barry J dismissed the husband's application to set aside the property orders, finding no evidence to support his valuation of the matrimonial property. The court held that the husband's inability to produce such evidence did not constitute a substantial and significant circumstance warranting the setting aside of the consent orders. Consequently, the husband's application under section 79A was dismissed. The court also dismissed all three contravention applications filed by the wife. The judgment also detailed various orders concerning the children's living arrangements, parental responsibility, communication, and educational and medical matters, made upon the undertakings of both parents.