Villar & Villar

Case [2025] FedCFamC1F 228

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

(DIVISION 1)

Villar & Villar [2025] FedCFamC1F 228

File number: SYC 2931 of 2022
Judgment of: CAMPTON J
Date of judgment: 7 April 2025
Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Joinder – Where the wife seeks joinder of the parties three adult children and various corporate and trust entities in which the husband has had an interest in – Where the husband, the other current 18 respondents, and the proposed additional 13 respondents do not oppose the joinder – Where r 3.01 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) mandates the joinder of the additional respondents as necessary parties to the proceedings – Order for the joinder of the 20th to 32nd respondents.
Legislation:

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 79

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) rr 2.50, 3.01
Division: Division 1 First Instance
Number of paragraphs: 17
Date of hearing: 7 April 2025
Place: Sydney
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Kearney SC with Mr Springthorpe
Solicitor for the Applicant: Rubin Blight Hardy Family Lawyers & Mediators
Counsel for the First Respondent: Mr Richardson SC with Mr Hollo
Solicitor for the First Respondent: Barkus Doolan Winning
Counsel for the Second to 19th, 24th, 25th, and 28th – 31st Respondents: Mr Williams KC
Solicitor for the Second to 19th, 24th, 25th, and 28th – 31st Respondents: Karras Partners Lawyers
Solicitor for the 20th and 32nd Respondents: Mr Burreket, Broun Abrahams Burreket
Counsel for the 22nd and 23rd Respondents: Mr Samson SC
Solicitor for the 22nd and 23rd Respondents: ATW Family Law
Solicitor for the 21st, 26th, and 27th Respondents: Ms Pigdon, Pigdon Norgate Family Lawyers

ORDERS

SYC 2931 of 2022

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN:

MS VILLAR

Applicant
AND:

MR VILLAR

First Respondent

MR B VILLAR

Second Respondent

F PTY LTD (and others named in the Schedule)

Third Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

CAMPTON J

DATE OF ORDER:

7 APRIL 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.On or before 9 April 2025 the wife has leave file her Further Amended Initiating Application in terms as commencing at page 130 of the exhibits to her affidavit filed on 14 March 2025.

2.The following parties are joined as parties to the proceedings:

(a)Mr C Villar as the 20th respondent;

(b)Mr E Villar as the 21st respondent;

(c)Mr D Villar as the 22nd respondent;

(d)G Pty Ltd as the 23rd respondent;

(e)H1 Pty Ltd as the 24th respondent;

(f)H2 Pty Ltd as the 25th respondent;

(g)J1 Pty Ltd as the 26th respondent;

(h)J2 Pty Ltd as the 27th respondent;

(i)K1 Pty Ltd as the 28th respondent;

(j)K2 Pty Ltd as the 29th respondent;

(k)K3 Pty Ltd as 30th

Continue reading Villar & Villar

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Villar & Villar [2025] FedCFamC1F 228
Case
[2025] FedCFamC1F 228
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of SYC 2931 of 2022, Ms Villar, the applicant, sought leave to join additional parties as respondents to the existing family law proceeding against her husband, Mr Villar, and others. Ms Villar, born in 1968, and her husband, born in 1956, who separated in July 2021, have three adult children who Ms Villar sought to join as respondents. Additionally, she sought to join various corporate and trust entities in which Mr Villar held interests. The existing respondents, including Mr Villar, the adult children, and the corporate and trust entities, did not oppose the joinder.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether Ms Villar should be granted leave to file a further amended initiating application and to join the proposed additional respondents as necessary parties to the proceeding. This determination hinged on whether the proposed additional respondents would be directly affected by the declarations or alternative relief sought by Ms Villar. The court had to consider whether the joinder was necessary to determine all issues in dispute in the proceeding, in accordance with rule 3.01 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021.

The court found that the proposed additional respondents would be directly affected by the declarations or alternative relief sought by Ms Villar, as the relief directly affected their rights. Given that none of the proposed additional respondents opposed the order for joinder, the court concluded that their joinder was necessary to determine all issues in dispute in the proceeding. Therefore, the court granted Ms Villar leave to file her further amended initiating application and ordered the joinder of the proposed additional respondents. The court also specified deadlines for the filing of the further amended initiating application and for the proposed additional respondents to file and serve a Notice of Address for Service.

The final orders included granting Ms Villar leave to file her further amended initiating application by a specified date, joining the proposed additional respondents, and setting a deadline for each of these respondents to file and serve a Notice of Address for Service. The form of the order was subject to review to remedy any minor typographical or grammatical errors, or to record a variation to the order.

Orders

Orders of the court

SYC 2931 of 2022

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)

BETWEEN:

MS VILLAR

Applicant

AND:

MR VILLAR

First Respondent

MR B VILLAR

Second Respondent

F PTY LTD (and others named in the Schedule)

Third Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

CAMPTON J

DATE OF ORDER:

7 APRIL 2025

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. On or before 9 April 2025 the wife has leave file her Further Amended Initiating Application in terms as commencing at page 130 of the exhibits to her affidavit filed on 14 March 2025.

2. The following parties are joined as parties to the proceedings:

(a) Mr C Villar as the 20th respondent;

(b) Mr E Villar as the 21st respondent;

(c) Mr D Villar as the 22nd respondent;

(d) G Pty Ltd as the 23rd respondent;

(e) H1 Pty Ltd as the 24th respondent;

(f) H2 Pty Ltd as the 25th respondent;

(g) J1 Pty Ltd as the 26th respondent;

(h) J2 Pty Ltd as the 27th respondent;

(i) K1 Pty Ltd as the 28th respondent;

(j) K2 Pty Ltd as the 29th respondent;

(k) K3 Pty Ltd as 30th respondent;

(l) L3 Pty Ltd as the 31st respondent; and

(m) M Pty Ltd as the 32nd respondent.

3. Each of the 20th – 32nd respondents file and serve a Notice of Address for Service on or before 11 April 2025.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.

Background

Background to the litigation

These reasons determine the wife’s application to join additional parties as the 20th to 32nd respondents to the proceeding.BACKGROUND The husband was born in 1956 and is 69 years old. The wife was born in 1968 and is 56 years old. They commenced cohabitation in late 1998, married in late 1989, and separated on 5 July 2021. There are three children of the relationship, Mr C Villar born in 1989, currently 35 years old, Mr D Villar born in 1991, currently 33 years old, and Mr E Villar born in 1994, currently 31 years old. The wife seeks to join the children as parties to the proceeding as the proposed 20th, 22nd and 21st Respondents respectively. A significant value of the property of the parties comprises interests held by the husband in “the N Entities”. The husband says he is a property developer, describing the N Entities as a “sophisticated corporate group” whose primary business is the development of residential, commercial, retail, hospitality, and urban infrastructure developments. The group includes numerous companies, a significant number of trusts and joint venture structures, in turn holding substantial real property interests. The husband and the wife have other property interests which sit outside the N Entities. The wife seeks to adjust the property of she and the husband equally. On 5 July 2024 she filed an Amended Initiating Application seeking that the husband transfer to her units in specified unit trusts and shares in companies forming part of the N Entities, and in the alternative sought for the husband to redeem units held by him in unit trusts and the for the proceeds to be paid to her. Her relief at that time mandated, pursuant to r 3.01 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) (“the Rules”), the joinder of the second to 19th respondents. The husband broadly contends that the property of he and the wife ought to be adjusted 70 per cent in his favour and 30 per cent in favour of the wife. By way of his Amended Response to an Initiating Application filed on 10 July 2024, he seeks to transfer to the wife his interests in property at Suburb BB and in real properties in Queensland. By way of the Response to an Initiating Application filed on 27 August 2024, the second to 19th respondents seek to facilitate the implementation of the orders sought by the husband, and for the husband to transfer them “such funds or assets as the Court thinks fit to provide restitution to each respondent adversely affected by the making of [any s 79] Orders”. The wife contends that structural changes have been made to the N Entities including transferring valuable interests to entities which the adult children of she and the husband, but not the husband, now have an interest. The wife contends that each of these changes “materially reduce the value” of the husband’s interest in the N Entities. It is her case that these changes have necessitated proposed variations as to the final relief she seeks.WHETHER THE WIFE BE GRANTED LEAVE TO FILE A FURTHER AMENDED INITIATING APPLICATION AND TO JOIN ADDITIONAL PARTIES

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

The proposed additional respondents are directly affected by the proposed declaration sought on amendment by way the wife, or by way of her proposed alternative relief sought. In circumstances where the relief proposed by the wife directly affects the rights of the proposed additional respondents and having regard to none of the proposed additional respondents opposing the order for joinder, I find that their joinder is necessary to determine all issues in dispute in the proceeding.CONCLUSION The wife will be granted leave to file her amended initiating application as contained at page 130 of the exhibits to her affidavit filed on 14 March 2025. An order for joinder of the proposed additional respondents as sought will be made.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.