Surridge and Surridge (No 2)

Link copied
Case Copied 11 min read

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SURRIDGE & SURRIDGE (NO 2) [2015] FamCA 755
FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Application for stay of final orders pending appeal – Stay granted in respect of particular orders.

Family Law Rules 2004, r 22.11

APPLICANT: Ms Surridge
RESPONDENT: Mr Surridge
FILE NUMBER: PAC 4412 of 2012
DATE DELIVERED: 11 September 2015
PLACE DELIVERED: Parramatta
PLACE HEARD: Parramatta
JUDGMENT OF: Foster J
HEARING DATE: 8 September 2015

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Schonell SC
SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Matthews Folbigg Pty Ltd
SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Tilley Family Law & Mediation

Orders

  1. That the operation of Orders 6 and 7 made on 29 June 2015 be stayed pending further order or determination of the wife’s appeal.

  2. Liberty to apply as to implementation or operation of the previous order.

  3. That the costs of the parties be reserved until determination of the appeal.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Surridge & Surridge (No 2) has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT PARRAMATTA

FILE NUMBER: PAC 4412  of 2012

Ms Surridge

Applicant

And

Mr Surridge

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. The applicant wife seeks a stay of final property orders made on the 29 June 2015. Orders were made after a protracted final hearing: Surridge [2015] FamCA 493.

  2. Orders were made as follows:

    By Consent:

    (1)      That the parties forthwith do all acts and things and sign all documents to cause the following things to occur with respect to the company B Pty Ltd:

    (a)       The 2013 and 2014 statements of financial position to be amended so as to consolidate into one loan account in the joint names of the parties all advances and loan accounts of the parties reported in the statements of financial position;

    (b)      Dividends then to be declared to each of the parties fully franked for each of the following financial years:

    (i)       For the 2013 financial year $37,479 imputation credit and $87,452 franked amount;

    (ii)      For the 2014 financial year $15,366 imputation credit and $35,855 franked amount;

    (iii)     For the 2015 financial year $115,505 fully franked;

    (c)       That on the dividends being declared and the 2015 financial statements and tax return prepared and lodged the company to be struck off the company register conducted by ASIC;

    (d)      The 2015 financial statements to be prepared so as to:

    (i)       Write off the office equipment;

    (ii)      Write off the loan to C Pty Ltd;

    (iii)     Write off the loan to D Pty Ltd.

    (2)      That the husband shall assign to the wife the benefit of any loan account in his favour created by virtue of Order (1)(d)(iii) in the event that the wife retains that company and the units in the Surridge Unit Trust pursuant to the final orders for property settlement.

    (3)      That each of the parties shall pay one half of the costs of implementation of these orders…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Surridge and Surridge (No 2) 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
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2015] FamCA 755
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application by the wife for a stay of certain orders made on 29 June 2015, pending the determination of her appeal. The husband sought to oppose this application.

The primary legal issue before Foster J was whether the wife had established sufficient grounds to warrant a stay of the previous orders. This required the court to consider the principles governing the grant of a stay pending appeal, including the likelihood of success on appeal and the balance of convenience.

Foster J granted the stay, ordering that the operation of Orders 6 and 7 made on 29 June 2015 be stayed pending further order or determination of the wife’s appeal. Liberty to apply was granted in relation to the implementation or operation of the previous order, and the costs of the parties were reserved until the determination of the appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

That the operation of Orders 6 and 7 made on 29 June 2015 be stayed pending further order or determination of the wife’s appeal.

2.

Liberty to apply as to implementation or operation of the previous order.

3.

That the costs of the parties be reserved until determination of the appeal.

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.