XU & PHAK

In proceedings before Bennett J of the Family Court of Australia, the husband and wife were engaged in a dispute concerning property interests and interim property settlement. The wife had lodged a caveat against a property located at DD Street, Suburb EE, Victoria, which the husband sought to have removed to facilitate its sale.

The court was required to determine whether it was appropriate to make a partial order for the sale of the property and the application of the proceeds, notwithstanding the ongoing substantive proceedings. The court also considered the wife's duty of full and frank disclosure and the appropriate orders regarding costs.

Bennett J reasoned that it was appropriate to make an interim order for the sale of the property to preserve its value and to facilitate a partial property settlement. The court ordered the wife to withdraw her caveat within seven days, authorising the Registrar of the Family Court to sign the withdrawal document if the wife failed to do so. The husband was granted liberty to proceed with the sale of the property, with the proceeds to be applied first to sale costs, then to discharge encumbrances, and then to pay the husband's legal costs up to $160,000. The net proceeds were to be held in trust pending further order, and the amount received by the husband was to be credited against his final entitlement. The court also dismissed applications relating to discovery by both parties and ordered the wife to pay the husband's costs on a party/party basis.