WUNDERLY & WAUGH
[2012] FMCAfam 905
•20 August 2012
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| WUNDERLY & WAUGH | [2012] FMCAfam 905 |
| FAMILY LAW – Property – property orders – variation of orders – where respondent changed his name on acquiring Australian citizenship – necessity for order to reflect the name on the certificate of title. |
| Applicant: | MS WUNDERLY |
| Respondent: | MR WAUGH (ALSO KNOWN AS [MR L]) |
| File Number: | SYC 3867 of 2010 |
| Judgment of: | Scarlett FM |
| Hearing date: | 20 August 2012 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 20 August 2012 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 20 August 2012 |
REPRESENTATION
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | In person |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | No Appearance |
ORDERS
The Respondent Husband, [Mr L] (also known as Mr Waugh), within 42 days of the date of the final orders in this matter do all acts and sign all documents necessary to transfer all his right title and interest in the property, folio identifier ([omitted]) and known as Property M, [A] NSW to the Applicant Wife Ms Wunderly.
That if the Respondent Husband, [Mr L] (Mr Waugh), refuses or neglects to execute any deed or instrument within fourteen (14) days of being requested to do so then the Registrar of the Federal Magistrates Court be appointed pursuant to section 106A to execute such deed or instrument in the name of such party and to do all acts and things necessary to give validity to the operation of the deed or instrument.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Wunderly & Waugh is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
SYC 3867 of 2010
| MS WUNDERLY |
Applicant
And
| MR WAUGH |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Application
This is an Application by the wife to vary or amend orders that were made ex parte by Baumann FM on 1 March 2012. The Applicant has appeared but there has been no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent.
On the previous occasion his Honour made property Orders requiring the Respondent husband, known as Mr Waugh, to do all such things necessary to transfer to the Applicant all of his interest in a property in [A], New South Wales. It appears that the Respondent has returned to China permanently.
Whilst his Honour made the Orders exactly as sought by the Applicant, this Application has been brought about by the fact that the Applicant has ascertained that the Respondent’s name on the title to the property is described as “[Mr L]” rather than “Mr Waugh”, the name by which he was known in Australia. Consequently, the Applicant needs an Order describing the Respondent by the name that is on the title.
Orders Sought
The Applicant seeks the following Orders:
1. The Respondent Husband, [Mr L] (also known as Mr Waugh), within 42 days of the date of the final orders in this matter do all acts and things and sign all documents necessary to transfer all his right title and interest in the property, folio identifier ([omitted]) and known as Property M [A] NSW to the Applicant wife, Ms Wunderly.
2. That if the Respondent Husband, [Mr L] (Mr Waugh), refuses or neglects to execute any deed or instrument within fourteen (14) days of being requested to do so then the Registrar of the Court be appointed pursuant to section 106A to execute such deed or instrument in the name of such party and to do all acts and things necessary to give validity to the operation of the deed or instrument.
The reference to section 106A is a reference to s.106A of the Family Law Act 1975.
Evidence
The Applicant relies on:
a)her Application;
b)her affidavit sworn 12 July 2012;
c)an Acknowledgment of Service signed by the Respondent.
The Applicant explained her predicament in her affidavit:
11. I have got an Order on 1/3/2012 for the property. But I could not transfer the real estate to my name since the current order refers to respondent’s name is MR WAUGH while the property’s name is MS WUNDERLY & [MR L].
12. Actually, “[MR L]”, is the same person as “MR WAUGH” referred to (in) the court orders, such as he has two Medicare cards under the two different names but the card numbers are the same.[1]
[1] Affidavit of Ms Wunderly 12.7.2012 at paragraphs [11]-[12]
The Applicant had previously made clear that when the Respondent became an Australian citizen on 26th June 2008 he changed his name from [Mr L] to Mr Waugh.
Conclusions
It is appropriate to make Orders varying the original Orders so that the Applicant may make the necessary arrangements to transfer the title into her name. There is evidence that the Respondent has been served. He has not filed a Response or any document opposing the orders sought.
The orders will be made accordingly.
I certify that the preceding ten (10) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Scarlett FM
Date: 3 September 2012
0
0
0