Simmons and Simmons and Ors (No. 3)

[2009] FamCA 433

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SIMMONS & SIMMONS AND ORS (NO. 3) [2009] FamCA 433

FAMILY LAW – CONSENT ORDERS

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Simmons

RESPONDENT: Mr Simmons

SECOND RESPONDENT: R Pty Ltd

THIRD RESPONDENT: L Pty Ltd

FILE NUMBER: MLF 1269 of 2005

DATE DELIVERED: 12 May 2009

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

PLACE HEARD: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Cronin J

HEARING DATE: 12 May 2009

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr North SC with Mr Sweeney

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Lander & Rogers

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Ackman QC with Mr Mellilli

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Kenna Teasdale Lawyers

COUNSEL FOR THE SECOND & THIRD RESPONDENTS Mr Bartfeld QC

SOLICITORS FOR THE SECOND & THIRD RESPONDENTS KennedyWisewolds Lawyers

Orders

1. That BY CONSENT there be orders in accordance with the minutes of proposed orders marked Exhibit “A” sealed and attached hereto AND IT IS DIRECTED that such minutes remain upon the Court file.

2. That the solicitor for the wife engross the minutes and deliver them by electronic transmission to my Associate within 7 days.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Simmons & Simmons and Ors is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER:  MLF 1269 of 2005

MS SIMMONS

Applicant

And

MR SIMMONS

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is a matter that has concluded by the parties agreeing to some orders being made.  They are, to say the least, complicated; and each party approaches the matter from a different perspective.  From the wife's perspective, she is receiving about 45 per cent of the pool and from the husband's perspective it is about 100 per cent.  The difference between the parties really depends upon what one values at and what the legal entitlement is to an interest that the husband has in a settlement.

2. This settlement is something that seems to me to be well within the range of probable outcomes and has a strong ring of commercial reality about it.  I am satisfied in the circumstances that notwithstanding there is an opportunity for the parties to come back in the event of default, it seems to me that if the settlement is implemented according to the terms, it is just and equitable - and I am so prepared to declare.

3. In the matter of Simmons, I make orders by consent in terms of the minutes which I will mark as Exhibit A.

I certify that the preceding Three (3) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Cronin

Associate: 

Date:  21 May 2009