SEIDLER & CERNY (No.2)

In the matter of SEIDLER & CERNY (No.2), Chief Judge Pascoe of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the Applicant Wife against the Respondent Husband concerning their matrimonial home. The dispute centred on the wife's claim for sole use and occupation of the property and an interim adjustment of property interests.

The court was required to determine whether to grant interim orders for the wife's exclusive possession of the property, to restrain the husband from attending the property, and to effect an interim transfer of the property to the wife. Additionally, the court considered the terms of any interim property adjustment, including the wife's responsibility for mortgage payments and outgoings, and the potential for a Registrar to execute documents on behalf of a party. The court also had to decide on the transfer of the substantive matter to another registry.

Chief Judge Pascoe reasoned that the circumstances warranted interim orders to provide certainty and security for the applicant. The court applied principles relating to interim property adjustments under the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), specifically s.106A, to facilitate the transfer of the property. The court ordered that the Applicant Wife have sole use and occupation of the property, that the Respondent Husband be restrained from entering it, and that the property be transferred to the wife within seven days, with a Registrar empowered to sign necessary documents if a party refused. The wife was also ordered to indemnify the husband for mortgage payments and outgoings.

The court further ordered that the applicant be restrained from further encumbering the property except in accordance with an existing mortgage. The substantive matter was transferred to the Family Court of Australia at Sydney, with costs reserved until the final hearing.