WITHERS & WITHERS

Case [2018] FamCA 920


FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WITHERS & WITHERS [2018] FamCA 920

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim property – Interim Application – consideration of applicable principles – Where insufficient evidence has been adduced by the parties for an assessment of the parties’ assets and liabilities and contributions to be made – Where there is a conflict in the evidence and issues in dispute that are not capable of resolution at interim hearing – Where application dismissed – Where it is appropriate to make an order for costs to be reserved to final trial.

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – Interim spousal maintenance – Consideration of applicable principles – Where wife has not established incapacity to support  herself adequately – Where application dismissed

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 72, 75, 79
Strahan & Strahan [2009] FamCAFC 166
Harris & Harris (1993) FLC 92-378
APPLICANT: Ms Withers
RESPONDENT: Mr Withers
FILE NUMBER: CRC 129 of 2017
DATE DELIVERED: 9 November 2018
PLACE DELIVERED: Parramatta
PLACE HEARD: Parramatta
JUDGMENT OF: Foster J
HEARING DATE: 17 September 2018

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr Petersen
SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Nambucca Valley Legal
COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Grew
SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Coleman Greig Lawyers

Orders

  1. That the wife’s Application in a Case filed 22 August 2018 be dismissed.

  2. That the parties’ costs of and incidental to the said application be reserved to final trial.

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 Withers & Withers 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 PARRAMATTA

FILE NUMBER: CRC 129 of 2017

Ms Withers

Applicant

And

Mr Withers

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. The application for determination is as to interim financial issues.

  2. In April 2017 the applicant wife filed an Amended Initiating Application seeking property settlement orders in substance as follows:

    a)that the husband transfer to her his interest in a real estate property at B Town;

    b)that simultaneously with that transfer the husband pay to the wife the sum of $500,000.00;

    c)that simultaneously with the payment to the wife transfer to the husband her interest in a real estate property at C Town;

    d)that simultaneously on compliance with the previous orders the husband refinance the mortgage secured over the C Town property into his name;

    e)that the husband indemnify the wife in relation to any debts and loan accounts liability that she may have in relation to D Pty Ltd, E Pty Ltd, the Withers Family Trust, and the Withers Partnership.

  3. In July 2017 the husband filed a…

Continue reading WITHERS & WITHERS

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
WITHERS & WITHERS [2018] FamCA 920
Case
[2018] FamCA 920
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Withers & Withers*, Foster J of the Family Court of Australia considered an interim application concerning property settlement and spousal maintenance. The wife sought orders for property and interim spousal maintenance, but the court found that insufficient evidence had been provided by the parties to make a proper assessment of their assets, liabilities, and contributions. Furthermore, significant conflicts in the evidence and disputed issues were not capable of resolution at an interim hearing.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether to grant the wife's application for property settlement and interim spousal maintenance, and if so, on what basis. Specifically, the court had to determine if the wife had established a case for interim property orders given the evidentiary deficiencies and disputed facts, and whether she had demonstrated an incapacity to support herself adequately to warrant interim spousal maintenance.

Foster J dismissed the wife's application for property settlement, finding that the evidence presented was insufficient for the court to make a determination regarding the parties' financial positions and contributions. Similarly, the application for interim spousal maintenance was dismissed on the basis that the wife had not established that she was unable to support herself adequately. The court noted that the disputes and lack of evidence meant that these matters were not suitable for resolution at an interim stage.

Consequently, the wife's Application in a Case filed on 22 August 2018 was dismissed. The court further ordered that the parties' costs of and incidental to this application be reserved to the final trial.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

That the wife’s Application in a Case filed 22 August 2018 be dismissed.

2.

That the parties’ costs of and incidental to the said application be reserved to final trial.

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.