SUDONO & SUDONO
Case
•
[2010] FamCA 54
•20 January 2010
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
SUDONO & SUDONO [2010] FamCA 54
[2010] FamCA 54
20 January 2010
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of *SUDONO & SUDONO*, Rose J of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia made orders concerning an interim property settlement between the parties. The dispute involved the wife's application for funds to purchase real estate, with the husband's solicitors to be kept informed of the transaction and the wife to be restrained from dealing with the property without consent.
The court was required to determine the terms upon which an interim disbursement of funds should be made to the wife for the purchase of real estate. Specifically, the court considered the amount to be disbursed, the conditions for its use, and the restrictions to be placed on the property acquired.
Rose J ordered that the sum of $500,000 be disbursed from trust funds held by Randles Cooper & Co. to the wife's solicitors for payment to the wife. This amount was to be used solely for the purchase of real estate in the wife's sole name in specified Melbourne suburbs, or elsewhere in metropolitan Melbourne, with a portion also permitted for stamp duty and legal costs. The wife was further restrained from selling, transferring, or encumbering the real estate without the husband's written consent or a further court order, and was permitted to occupy the property exclusively, also subject to the husband's consent or further order.
The court was required to determine the terms upon which an interim disbursement of funds should be made to the wife for the purchase of real estate. Specifically, the court considered the amount to be disbursed, the conditions for its use, and the restrictions to be placed on the property acquired.
Rose J ordered that the sum of $500,000 be disbursed from trust funds held by Randles Cooper & Co. to the wife's solicitors for payment to the wife. This amount was to be used solely for the purchase of real estate in the wife's sole name in specified Melbourne suburbs, or elsewhere in metropolitan Melbourne, with a portion also permitted for stamp duty and legal costs. The wife was further restrained from selling, transferring, or encumbering the real estate without the husband's written consent or a further court order, and was permitted to occupy the property exclusively, also subject to the husband's consent or further order.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Property Law
-
Equity & Trusts
Legal Concepts
-
Injunction
-
Remedies
-
Fiduciary Duty
-
Constructive Trust
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
SUDONO & SUDONO [2010] FamCA 54
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
1