FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| SOMERS& ETTRIDGE | [2018] FamCA 874 |
| FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – interim applications – where the applicant seeks $14,500 but is unable to identify the head of power upon which he seeks to rely– where the applicant seeks disclosure from the respondent – where orders have already been made in relation to disclosure – issue of disclosure will need to be determined by the trial judge – where the applicant seeks litigation funding – where the litigation funding application must fail in accordance with the provision of s 117 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – where the respondent proposes that the applicant extend the loan facility against the real property up to $50,000 – order made permitting the applicant to borrow $50,000 against the real property with the sum to be characterised as part property settlement. FAMILY LAW – INJUNCTIONS – interim injunction made preventing the applicant from dealing with real property and the parties’ self-managed superannuation fund. |
| Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 79, 117 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) | ||
| APPLICANT: | Mr Somers | |
| RESPONDENT: | Ms Ettridge |
| FILE NUMBER: | MLC | 11262 | of | 2015 |
| DATE DELIVERED: | 7 September 2018 |
| PLACE DELIVERED: | Melbourne |
| PLACE HEARD: | Melbourne |
| JUDGMENT OF: | Johns J |
| HEARING DATE: | 7 September 2018 |
REPRESENTATION
| THE APPLICANT: | In Person |
| COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: | Ms Paterson |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: | Carew Counsel Pty Ltd |
Orders
IT IS ORDERED
That except as otherwise provided and until further order, the respondent MR SOMERS be restrained by injunction from doing any act or thing that may cause the property situated at and known as B Street, Suburb C in the State of Victoria being the whole of the land contained in Certificate of title Folio Identifier Volume … Folio … (“the Suburb C property”) to be disposed, of sold, transferred, assigned, leased, further mortgaged or further encumbered in any manner whatsoever.
That until further order, the respondent MR SOMERS be restrained by injunction from further increasing the balance of the F Bank home loan account number ... secured over the Suburb C property, currently in the sum of $124,888.17 (as at 30 June 2018) save for the purpose of borrowing $50,000 so as to meet his costs to obtain legal representation for the purposes of the final hearing scheduled to occur on 23 October 2018, with this sum to be characterised as part property settlement to the respondent and with the respondent to meet all repayments (interest and principal) with respect to those borrowings.
That until further order, the respondent MR SOMERS and/or his servants and/or his agents, be restrained by injunction from withdrawing, disposing of or otherwise dealing with the funds held in F Bank Prime Access Account No. …54, F Bank Account No. …56 held in the name of the G Super Fund and/or any other bank accounts held in the name of the G Super Fund.
That these orders be forthwith served upon F Bank by the applicant.
BY CONSENT IT IS ORDERED
That the respondent
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read SOMERS& ETTRIDGE 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
- [2018] FamCA 874
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine the validity of Mr. Somers' applications for disclosure and litigation funding, and to consider Ms. Ettridge's proposal regarding the loan facility. The legal issues also encompassed the appropriate interim orders to be made concerning the parties' real property and superannuation fund.
Johns J reasoned that the issue of disclosure would be determined by the trial judge, and that Mr. Somers' application for litigation funding failed in accordance with section 117 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The court made orders restraining Mr. Somers from dealing with the real property and the parties' self-managed superannuation fund. Crucially, the court permitted Mr. Somers to borrow $50,000 against the real property, to be characterised as part property settlement, with Mr. Somers to meet all repayments. The court also ordered that Mr. Somers permit a valuer access to inspect the real property.
Orders
Orders of the court
IT IS ORDERED
1.
That except as otherwise provided and until further order, the respondent MR SOMERS be restrained by injunction from doing any act or thing that may cause the property situated at and known as B Street, Suburb C in the State of Victoria being the whole of the land contained in Certificate of title Folio Identifier Volume … Folio … (“the Suburb C property”) to be disposed, of sold, transferred, assigned, leased, further mortgaged or further encumbered in any manner whatsoever.
2.
That until further order, the respondent MR SOMERS be restrained by injunction from further increasing the balance of the F Bank home loan account number ... secured over the Suburb C property, currently in the sum of $124,888.17 (as at 30 June 2018) save for the purpose of borrowing $50,000 so as to meet his costs to obtain legal representation for the purposes of the final hearing scheduled to occur on 23 October 2018, with this sum to be characterised as part property settlement to the respondent and with the respondent to meet all repayments (interest and principal) with respect to those borrowings.
3.
That until further order, the respondent MR SOMERS and/or his servants and/or his agents, be restrained by injunction from withdrawing, disposing of or otherwise dealing with the funds held in F Bank Prime Access Account No. …54, F Bank Account No. …56 held in the name of the G Super Fund and/or any other bank accounts held in the name of the G Super Fund.
4.
That these orders be forthwith served upon F Bank by the applicant.
BY CONSENT IT IS ORDERED
5.
That the respondent MR SOMERS permit Mr H of J Valuers access to inspect the Suburb C property at 10.30am on Friday 14 September 2018.
BY THE COURT IT IS ORDERED
6.
That the Application in a Case filed 28 August 2018 and the Response to Application in a Case filed this day be otherwise dismissed.
7.
That the wife’s costs of this day be reserved to the Trial Judge.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.
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.