FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| WALFORD & BANTOCK | [2020] FamCA 78 |
| FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – bankrupt applicant – trustee-in-bankruptcy appointed – real property is vested property for the purposes of the bankruptcy – applicant seeking leave to make submissions in the proceeding despite the trustee’s appointment – whether she demonstrated exceptional circumstances – none shown. |
| Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), ss 58(1), 116(1) Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss 90SM(15), 90SM(16) Migration Act 1958 (Cth), pt 7AA |
| APPLICANT: | Ms Walford |
| FIRST RESPONDENT: | Mr Bantock |
| SECOND RESPONDENT: | Mr Michel (trustee-in-bankruptcy) |
| FILE NUMBER: | MLC | 9336 | of | 2018 |
| DATE DELIVERED: | 18 February 2020 |
| PLACE DELIVERED: | Melbourne |
| PLACE HEARD: | Melbourne |
| JUDGMENT OF: | The Honourable Justice Wilson |
| HEARING DATE: | 7 February 2020 |
REPRESENTATION
| COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: | Not applicable |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: | Not applicable |
| COUNSEL FOR THE FIRST RESPONDENT: | Not applicable |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE FIRST RESPONDENT: | Not applicable |
| COUNSEL FOR THE SECOND RESPONDENT: | Not applicable |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE SECOND RESPONDENT: | Aitken Partners Pty Ltd |
Orders
The applicant’s application for leave under s 90SM(16) of the Family Law Act to make submissions in relation to vested property is refused.
This proceeding is referred to the senior registrar for further case management.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Walford & Bantock has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).
| FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE |
FILE NUMBER: MLC 9336 of 2018
| Ms Walford |
Applicant
And
| Mr Bantock |
First Respondent
And
| Mr Michel (trustee-in-bankruptcy) |
Second Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Introduction
The applicant’s interim application in this proceeding was referred to me by…
Continue reading Walford and Bantock
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Walford and Bantock [2020] FamCA 78
- Case
- [2020] FamCA 78
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant should be granted leave to make submissions regarding vested property. This required the court to consider the scope and application of s 90SM(16) of the *Family Law Act*, which governs the circumstances under which such submissions can be made.
Justice Wilson refused the applicant's application for leave. While the detailed reasoning is not provided, the refusal indicates that the court found the criteria for granting leave under s 90SM(16) were not met in this instance. The court then referred the proceeding to the senior registrar for further case management.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
The applicant’s application for leave under s 90SM(16) of the Family Law Act to make submissions in relation to vested property is refused.
2.
This proceeding is referred to the senior registrar for further case management.
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.