Barry Eakins

The applicant brought a motion for a preservation order under section 12 of the Family Law Act to prevent the respondent from dissipating assets, specifically the proceeds from the sale of several real properties owned by his corporations.

The respondent argued the applicant must meet the strict test for a Mareva injunction.

The court rejected the application of the Mareva test, noting the respondent had previously admitted the applicant owned half the land.

The court granted a narrow preservation order restricting the depletion of the net proceeds of the sale of the specific properties.

The appellant appealed a judgment dismissing its application regarding a failed real estate transaction.

The respondent sellers terminated an agreement of purchase and sale due to the appellant's failure to pay a further deposit.

The application judge found the termination was effective and that the respondents did not waive their right to terminate by engaging in subsequent negotiations.

The Court of Appeal upheld the application judge's decision, finding no error in the application of the doctrine of waiver and dismissing the appeal with costs awarded to the respondents.