Younan and Younan (No 2)
Case
•
[2014] FamCA 996
•3 September 2014
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Younan and Younan (No 2) [2014] FamCA 996
[2014] FamCA 996
3 September 2014
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of *Younan and Younan (No 2)*, Johns J of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia was required to determine the appropriate orders concerning the sale of a property owned by the husband and wife, who were parties to family law proceedings. The dispute centred on the terms and conditions under which the property, located in Suburb L, should be marketed and sold.
The primary legal issue before the court was how to facilitate the sale of the jointly owned property, specifically addressing the appointment of a selling agent, the method of sale, the setting of a reserve price, and the process to be followed if the property did not sell at auction. The court also had to consider the dismissal of certain applications filed by the parties.
Johns J ordered that the husband and wife appoint Q Agents as the sole selling agents for the property. The sale was to be conducted by public auction within 45 days of the agent's appointment. The reserve sale price was to be agreed upon by the parties in consultation with the selling agent. In the event of disagreement, the reserve price was to be determined by valuers appointed by each party, and if they failed to agree, by the President of the Real Estate Institute of Victoria or their nominee. The court further stipulated that the reserve price was to be determined by the nominated valuers or the President of the Real Estate Institute of Victoria (or nominee) by a specific deadline prior to the auction, taking into account the marketing efforts to date. If the property failed to sell at the nominated reserve price, it was to be marketed by private sale for a further 30 days at that reserve price or a revised reserve determined by the President of the Real Estate Institute of Victoria or their nominee. The wife's Amended Application in a Case and the husband's Response were otherwise dismissed, with liberty reserved to the parties to apply.
The primary legal issue before the court was how to facilitate the sale of the jointly owned property, specifically addressing the appointment of a selling agent, the method of sale, the setting of a reserve price, and the process to be followed if the property did not sell at auction. The court also had to consider the dismissal of certain applications filed by the parties.
Johns J ordered that the husband and wife appoint Q Agents as the sole selling agents for the property. The sale was to be conducted by public auction within 45 days of the agent's appointment. The reserve sale price was to be agreed upon by the parties in consultation with the selling agent. In the event of disagreement, the reserve price was to be determined by valuers appointed by each party, and if they failed to agree, by the President of the Real Estate Institute of Victoria or their nominee. The court further stipulated that the reserve price was to be determined by the nominated valuers or the President of the Real Estate Institute of Victoria (or nominee) by a specific deadline prior to the auction, taking into account the marketing efforts to date. If the property failed to sell at the nominated reserve price, it was to be marketed by private sale for a further 30 days at that reserve price or a revised reserve determined by the President of the Real Estate Institute of Victoria or their nominee. The wife's Amended Application in a Case and the husband's Response were otherwise dismissed, with liberty reserved to the parties to apply.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Civil Procedure
-
Property Law
Legal Concepts
-
Remedies
-
Injunction
-
Costs
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0