Suffolk and Suffolk

In the matter of *Suffolk and Suffolk*, heard before O’Reilly J of the Family Court of Australia, the wife sought the enforcement of a binding financial agreement entered into by the parties on 3 March 2011. The husband had not complied with the terms of this agreement, leading to the wife’s application to have it upheld by the Court.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the binding financial agreement should be enforced as if it were a court order. This required the Court to consider the provisions of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) that permit the enforcement of such agreements.

O’Reilly J determined that the binding financial agreement was valid and enforceable. Applying section 90KA(c) of the *Family Law Act 1975*, the Court ordered that the agreement be enforced as if it were an order of the Court. Furthermore, pursuant to section 106A(1) of the Act, a Registrar was appointed to execute any necessary documents or perform any acts in the husband's name to facilitate the implementation of the agreement. The wife's costs in relation to her application were reserved.