Wei and Xia & Ors (No 2)

In *Wei and Xia & Ors (No 2)*, Austin J considered an application by the wife for interlocutory injunctions concerning four corporations and for spousal maintenance. The dispute involved the preservation of property, specifically in relation to three corporations in which the husband held interests, and the potential dissipation of assets by the third and fourth respondents, which the wife argued would prejudice her rights in the proceedings. The wife also sought spousal maintenance.

The court was required to determine whether injunctive relief was appropriate to preserve assets held by the corporations, given that the husband acquired an interest in one of the corporations after separation. Additionally, the court had to consider the assertion by the third and fourth respondents of their proprietary entitlement to extract capital from these commercial entities and whether such extraction would prejudice the wife's entitlements. The court also had to assess the parties' financial positions to determine the capacity for spousal maintenance, considering their stated expenditures exceeded their means.

Austin J concluded that injunctive relief was warranted in relation to three of the corporations, finding that the wife had established her entitlement to such relief to prevent the extraction of capital that would prejudice her rights. Regarding spousal maintenance, the court found that the husband had no apparent capacity to pay and that both parties had sufficient equity in real property to meet their respective needs, leading to the conclusion that they would need to utilise their own capital for support.

The court made various orders, including discharging previous orders, restraining the husband, third respondent, and fourth respondent from certain actions concerning specific corporations and a family trust, and requiring an accounting of monies received and expended. The wife was granted exclusive occupation of one property, and the husband of another, with restrictions on furniture removal. Both parties were restrained from redrawing or increasing loan amounts secured over specified properties. The court also ordered the husband to pay the wife's legal costs for expert witnesses and accountants engaged in the proceedings. Several applications for interim relief were dismissed.