Zeng and Jing & Anor

In the matter of *Zeng and Jing & Anor*, the husband sought interim orders concerning contact with a child under three years of age and a partial property settlement. The wife opposed the extent of the proposed contact arrangements, while the second respondent, the wife's mother, was involved in the property proceedings. The court, presided over by Cronin J, considered applications for both children's matters and property matters, including injunctive relief.

The primary legal issues before the court were the appropriate interim contact arrangements for the young child, the husband's entitlement to a partial property settlement on an urgent basis, and whether injunctive relief, including an application under section 106B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), should be granted to prevent the disposal of assets. The court also had to determine if there was sufficient evidence to support the husband's claim that his interests might be defeated by the disposal of property.

Regarding the children's matters, the court found that the husband's proposed two-stage approach to contact, which included overnight stays contingent on obtaining suitable accommodation, was inappropriate without understanding the potential impact on the child. However, the court did not find grounds for the wife's concerns about the husband's capacity to care for the child, given her willingness to have the child in her care shortly after separation. In relation to property, the court refused the husband's application for a partial property settlement due to incomplete or absent evidence from the wife and second respondent regarding property interests. While the court granted injunctions restraining the wife and second respondent from disposing of or encumbering fixed assets and from altering corporate or trust structures, it refused the application under section 106B of the *Family Law Act 1975* due to insufficient evidence that the husband's interests of claim might have been defeated.

The court made several orders, including adjourning the applications for interim orders concerning children and property, refusing the husband's application for a partial property settlement or litigation funding, and dismissing a specific paragraph of the husband's application. Injunctions were granted against the wife and second respondent concerning the disposal of assets and alteration of corporate structures. Leave was granted for the husband to apply to vary or extend parenting orders if no agreement was reached, and costs were reserved.