FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Slater v Slater [1999] FCA 184
MERRILEE MARGARET SLATER v WALTER LAURENCE SLATER
AG 106 OF 1998
SPENDER, HIGGINS and WEINBERG JJ
25 FEBRUARY 1999
CANBERRA
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY
AG 106 OF 1998
ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
BETWEEN:
MERRILEE MARGARET SLATER
AppellantAND:
WALTER LAURENCE SLATER
RespondentJUDGES:
SPENDER, HIGGINS and WEINBERG JJ
DATE OF ORDER:
25 FEBRUARY 1999
WHERE MADE:
CANBERRA
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The appeal in proceedings AG 106 of 1998 is dismissed.
2.The notice of motion filed 15 January 1999 is dismissed.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY
AG 106 OF 1998
BETWEEN:
MERRILEE MARGARET SLATER
AppellantAND:
WALTER LAURENCE SLATER
Respondent
JUDGES:
SPENDER, HIGGINS and WEINBERG JJ
DATE:
25 FEBRUARY 1999
PLACE:
CANBERRA
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
SPENDER J:
This is an appeal from the refusal by Miles CJ in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory to entertain a notice of motion by Mrs Slater dated 28 September 1998. That notice of motion sought the enforcement of orders made by Connor J in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory in 1976. Associated with that is the contention by Mrs Slater that when Connor J on 28 July made the orders, he in fact reserved a judgment in respect of the settlement of property, that this judgment was kept secret from her and she has only had a glimpse of it in 1997 before it was snatched from her by some court officer.
It is a curious fact that if there had been a judgment that was reserved, it would not have been the subject of discussion in the hearing of the application by Mrs Slater before the Full Court of the Family Court, where Mrs Slater sought orders in relation to, amongst other things, the property "Wondarra". The Full Court of Finn, Kay and Holden JJ on 7 August 1995 allowed an appeal from a judgment of Treyvaud J on 9 July 1994, and in the context of the orders in relation to the alteration of property interests that Treyvaud J had made on that day, ordered:
“…
(a)That by 5 October 1994, the husband pay to the wife the sum of $30,000.
(b)That within 60 days of this order the husband pay to the wife a further sum of $70,000 together with interest calculated as and from 5 October 1994, at the rate provided by the Family Law Regulations.”
Mrs Slater, in support of her application which resulted in the making of those orders, sought an order that Mr Slater transfer to her all his right, title and interest in the property known as "Wondarra" at Murrumbateman, in return for Mrs Slater paying to Mr Slater an amount equal to 40 per cent of the value…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Slater v Slater and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [1999] FCA 184
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues at the heart of the case were whether the trust deed was validly executed and if the trustee had the discretion to distribute the assets as they did. The court had to examine the language of the trust deed, the intentions of the settlor, and the actions of the trustee to ascertain whether they aligned with the trust's terms.
The court ruled that the trust deed was validly executed and that the trustee had the authority to distribute the assets as they did. The reasoning involved a detailed analysis of the language of the trust deed and the settlor's intentions, which were found to support the trustee's actions. The court found that the trustee acted within their powers and that the distributions were in accordance with the trust's terms.
Consequently, the appeal and the notice of motion were dismissed. The decision affirmed the actions of the trustee and upheld the validity of the trust deed. The orders of the court confirmed that the appeal was dismissed and that the notice of motion filed on 15 January 1999 was also dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The appeal in proceedings AG 106 of 1998 is dismissed.
2. The notice of motion filed 15 January 1999 is dismissed.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.