Shuren & Fang (No 7)

In the case of Shuren & Fang (No 7), the matter before the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia involved interlocutory injunctions that had previously been made to restrain the husband from dealing with, disposing of, encumbering, or diminishing the value of two properties. The wife had lodged caveats over the properties, and the husband had sought to have these removed to enable him to develop the land. The proceedings had a complex history, with the court describing the case as akin to a modern version of Charles Dickens' "Bleak House." The husband sought to have the injunctions varied, arguing there had been a material change in circumstances.

The court had to determine whether there had been a material change of circumstances that warranted the variation of the earlier interlocutory injunctions. The husband argued that the wife should be provided with security, but he preferred an undertaking over an injunction. The court noted that there was no legal basis for the husband's preference for an undertaking over an injunction, and it held that the court had no power to require an undertaking. The court also concluded that the differences between the parties were more about form than substance, and it was just and convenient to grant an injunction as sought by the wife.

The court varied the earlier injunctions to allow the husband to encumber the property up to a certain amount and to offer it as security in the ordinary course of his business, provided he gave written notice to the wife. The court also ordered that the husband provide monthly transaction histories or bank statements relating to properties owned or controlled by him or entities in which he has an interest. The costs of the husband's further amended application and the wife's response were reserved. The court also noted that certain documents produced by other entities and filed in the case would remain in the registry until further order.