Sarto & Sarto

The case of Sarto & Sarto involved an appeal by the wife, Ms Sarto, against an order made by the Magistrates Court of Western Australia that dismissed her application for interim exclusive occupation of the family home. The husband, Mr Sarto, was the respondent to the appeal. The primary issue before the court was whether Ms Sarto should be granted leave to appeal the lower court’s decision. Secondary issues included the lower court’s consideration of irrelevant matters, its application of an incorrect principle, and the overall error in the order made.

The court found that the magistrate had wrongly assumed that Mr Sarto had an inchoate proprietary interest in the property, despite the wife being the sole registered proprietor. The magistrate also took into account irrelevant matters and applied incorrect legal principles. The court concluded that the order was patently made in error. Given the potential impact of the appeal on the parties’ interim rights regarding the property, the court granted Ms Sarto leave to appeal. The appeal was ultimately successful, and the lower court's order was set aside. The husband was ordered to vacate the property and was restrained from entering it. All other outstanding applications for interim relief were dismissed, and no orders were made regarding costs.