Woodby-Chatterjee and Chatterjee

[2016] FamCA 902

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WOODBY-CHATTERJEE & CHATTERJEE [2016] FamCA 902

FAMILY LAW – PROCEDURE – Leave to amend grounds to challenge a Binding Financial Agreement – Where there had been no notice of the amendment – Where there had been a previous denial of reliance on such a ground – leave refused.

Garcia v National Australia Bank (1998) 72 ALJR 1243
Johnson v Buttress (1936) 56 CLR 113
Saintclaire & Saintclaire [2015] FamCAFC 245
Yerkey v Jones(1939) 63 CLR 649;

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)

APPLICANT: Ms Woodby-Chatterjee

RESPONDENT: Mr Chatterjee

FILE NUMBER: SYC 3822 of 2013

DATE DELIVERED: 26 October 2016

PLACE DELIVERED: Sydney

PLACE HEARD: Sydney

JUDGMENT OF: Le Poer Trench J

HEARING DATE: 25-28 July 2016

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Ms Obrart

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: G & D Lawyers

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Ms Bridger

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Bricknell Legal

Orders

1. The wife is restrained, pending further order, from further pursuing in this hearing a claim of presumed undue influence as a ground upon which the court may grant the remedy sought by her should such claim be established.

2. The court notes that the parties have been advised by it, during the argument advanced by each, that the order now made may be one of the orders available to the court upon the determination of the husband’s application and consequently thereon, each party should consider whether any further application might be made.

3. The court will hear any further application which might be made by either party arising from this determination following the luncheon adjournment or at any time thereafter prior to the conclusion of the proceeding.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Chatterjee & Woodby-Chatterjee 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 SYDNEY

FILE NUMBER: SYC 3822/2013

Ms Woodby-Chatterjee

Applicant

And

Mr Chatterjee

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. Before the Court is an application made by the husband, who is the applicant for Final Orders enforcing the provisions of a Binding Financial Agreement entered into between the parties and dated 28 January 2003. The application under consideration arises in respect of the application pursued by the wife, seeking the subject Financial Agreement be set aside.

2. The wording of the application the husband seeks, is as follows:

   The wife be restrained from pursuing a case that the Financial Agreement be set aside on the ground of established “presumed undue influence.

3. The husband submits that the wife has been required to provide particulars of her case. That is not an issue and the wife annexed to her affidavit (sworn 12 June 2015) a copy of a request for particulars received from the husband’s solicitors and dated 21 January 2014 (annexure “M”). She also annexed her answer to that request and marked the answer as annexure “N”. That answer was provided on 11 March 2014 (see exhibit H1). The request…