Slymms and Wisteria and Ors (No 2)
Case
•
[2011] FamCA 507
•30 June 2011
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Slymms and Wisteria and Ors (No 2) [2011] FamCA 507
[2011] FamCA 507
30 June 2011
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In *Slymms and Wisteria and Ors (No 2)*, Rose J determined the beneficial interests of the parties in various real properties and funds, and made orders for the division of assets and payment of sums between the husband and wife. The dispute concerned the equitable ownership of properties located at F Street and G Street, as well as net proceeds from the sale of a property at B Street, and the distribution of a motor vehicle, a business partnership, and associated business name.
The court was required to ascertain and declare the precise beneficial interests of the second and third respondents (presumably the wife and potentially a trust or company) in the specified real properties and the controlled monies account. Furthermore, the court had to make orders for the transfer of assets, including a motor vehicle and a business, and determine the payment of substantial sums of money between the parties. The orders also addressed the occupancy of a property and the dismissal of outstanding financial relief applications, save for costs.
Rose J declared that the second and third respondents held specific beneficial interests in the F Street and G Street properties, and in the net proceeds of sale from the B Street property. The court ordered the husband to facilitate the payment of $408,845.00 from the controlled monies account to the wife, and to transfer ownership of a Kia motor vehicle, dissolve the partnership known as Business 1, and transfer the business name and undertakings to the wife. Additionally, the husband was ordered to pay the wife $536,014.00. Upon the husband's compliance with these orders, the wife and children were to vacate the G Street property within eight weeks, with provisions for her exclusive occupancy pending compliance. The court also declared that each party was beneficially entitled to personalty in their respective possession, subject to the orders made.
The court was required to ascertain and declare the precise beneficial interests of the second and third respondents (presumably the wife and potentially a trust or company) in the specified real properties and the controlled monies account. Furthermore, the court had to make orders for the transfer of assets, including a motor vehicle and a business, and determine the payment of substantial sums of money between the parties. The orders also addressed the occupancy of a property and the dismissal of outstanding financial relief applications, save for costs.
Rose J declared that the second and third respondents held specific beneficial interests in the F Street and G Street properties, and in the net proceeds of sale from the B Street property. The court ordered the husband to facilitate the payment of $408,845.00 from the controlled monies account to the wife, and to transfer ownership of a Kia motor vehicle, dissolve the partnership known as Business 1, and transfer the business name and undertakings to the wife. Additionally, the husband was ordered to pay the wife $536,014.00. Upon the husband's compliance with these orders, the wife and children were to vacate the G Street property within eight weeks, with provisions for her exclusive occupancy pending compliance. The court also declared that each party was beneficially entitled to personalty in their respective possession, subject to the orders made.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Property Law
-
Equity & Trusts
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Remedies
-
Constructive Trust
-
Fiduciary Duty
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
7
Statutory Material Cited
1
Calverley v Green
[1984] HCA 81
Calverley v Green
[1984] HCA 81