AustLII [Home] [Databases] [WorldLII] [Search] [Feedback]

Federal Circuit Court of Australia

You are here: 
AustLII >> Databases >> Federal Circuit Court of Australia >> 2018 >> [2018] FCCA 1906

[Database Search] [Name Search] [Recent Decisions] [Noteup] [Download] [Context] [No Context] [Help]

 Squibb & Graham  [2018] FCCA 1906 (13 July 2018)

Last Updated: 16 July 2018

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

 SQUIBB & GRAHAM 
[2018] FCCA 1906


Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Property – financial agreement – application to set aside financial agreement- availability of rectification – failure to make reference to s.90B of the Act – whether the parties intended to enter in void agreement – rectification ordered.


Legislation:
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss.4(1), 71A, 79, 90B(2) 90G(1), 90G(1A), 90F(2), 90C(1), 90D(1), 90KA

Cases cited:
Caltex Australia Petroleum Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2008] FCA 1951; (2008) 173 FCR 359
Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd [2009] UKHL 38; [2009] AC 1101
Euphoric Pty Ltd v Rydelar Pty Ltd [2006] NSWSC 2
Senior & Anderson (2011) FLC 93 – 470
ASIC v Fortescue Metals Group Ltd & Anor [2011] FCAFC 19
Sullivan & Sullivan [2011] FamCA 752
Thorby v Goldberg [1964] HCA 41; (1964) 112 CLR 597


Applicant:
MS  SQUIBB 

Respondent:
MR  GRAHAM 

File Number:
MLC 9821 of 2016

Judgment of:
Judge McNab

Hearing date:
24 May 2018

Date of Last Submission:
24 May 2018

Delivered at:
Melbourne

Delivered on:
13 July 2018



REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant:
Mr Bartfield QC

Solicitors for the Applicant:
Lander & Rodgers

Counsel for the Respondent:
Mr Lim

Solicitors for the Respondent:
Francis Lim Barristers & Solicitors


ORDERS

(1) Pursuant to s.90KA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (‘the Act’) the financial agreement executed by the husband and the wife dated 9 July 2008 (‘the financial agreement’) be rectified such that it is amended to express that the financial agreement is made pursuant to s.90B of the Act.
(2) The court declares that the financial agreement is binding on the parties.
(3) Pursuant to s.90KA of the Act, clause 17 of the financial agreement be rectified to express the applicable law governing the financial agreement is the Act and that clause 17 be amended to provide:
The parties agree that this agreement is governed by the Act and any dispute arising from or in connection with this agreement shall be determined by the courts exercising jurisdiction under the Act.
(4) Costs of the application be reserved.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym  Squibb & Graham  is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT MELBOURNE

MLC 9821 of 2016

MS  SQUIBB 

Applicant

And

MR  GRAHAM 

Respondent


REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. By an initiating application filed on 11 October 2016, the wife, aged 44 years, seeks a declaration from the court that the financial agreement the parties entered into on 9 July 2008 is binding on the parties. The wife relies on her affidavits filed 30 January 2018 and 9 May 2018.
  2. The husband, aged 39 years, opposes the orders and seeks orders that the agreement be set aside. The husband relies on his affidavits filed
    2 February 2018, 11 May 2018 and 21 May 2018.

Background

  1. The wife was born on 1974. The husband was born on 1978.
  2. In April 2008 the parties had conversations about entering into a financial agreement.
  3. In early July 2008 the wife contacted Clifford Lawyers, spoke to a solicitor and gave instructions to draft a financial agreement.
  4. In early July 2008 the parties attended Clifford Lawyers, the wife received independent legal advice and Jane Carlos of that firm signed a certificate of independent legal advice.
  5. In early July the parties attended upon Francis Lim Solicitor & Barrister’s office. The husband received independent legal advice and Mr Lim signed a certificate of independent legal advice.
  6. The parties signed a document styled “Pre-Nuptial Agreement” which states that it is made on 9 July 2008. Certificates of independent legal advice were signed by the lawyers of both parties (“the agreement”).
  7. The parties married on 2008.
  8. On 2013 the parties’ son, [X] was born.
  9. On 23 November 2015 the parties separated.

Terms of the agreement

  1. I set out below relevant parts of the agreement:
13. Severability
14. Paragraph headings
15. Modification
16. Acknowledgements
17. Jurisdiction and proper law of contract
...
SCHEDULE 1
PROPERTIES OF MS  SQUIBB  REFRRED TO IN THIS AGREEMENT
SCHEDULE 2
PROPERTIES OF MR  GRAHAM  REFRRED TO IN THIS AGREEMENT
  1. The agreement contains signed Certificates of Independent Legal Advice. These are not dated. No issue is raised in relation to the certification process.

The Application

  1. The wife filed an application in a case on 30 January 2018. For the purposes of these proceedings that application sought: (copied exactly)
  2. In support of that application, the wife filed affidavits on 30 January 2018 and 9 May 2018.
  3. The 30 January 2018 affidavit set out the wife’s version of the background, procedural history, terms of the agreement, background to entering the agreement, arrangements subsequent to entering into the agreement and attempts to settle the issue.
  4. The 9 May 2018 affidavit repeated and expanded on the matters raised in the 30 January 2018 affidavit. The wife relied solely on the latter affidavit during the 24 May 2018 hearing.
  5. At paragraph 16 of her affidavit sworn 9 May 2018 the wife stated in relation to the background to entering into the agreement: (copied exactly)
  6. There was no objection to the statement of the wife in paragraph 19 of her affidavit. The evidence of the pre contractual negotiations is admissible to establish the objective background facts known to both parties and is relevant to the claim for rectification: see Euphoric Pty Ltd v Rydelar Pty Ltd [2006] NSWSC 2 at [31]- [33].
  7. The wife filed a Further Amended Reply on 9 May 2018 where she sought: (copied exactly)
  8. In her outline of case filed 22 May 2018 the wife submits that the agreement is a binding financial agreement for the purposes of s.90B of the Act: (copied exactly)
  9. She further submits that the agreement on its face provides that: (copied exactly)
  10. The husband filed a response on 2 February 2018 and filed affidavits on 2 February 2018, 11 May 2018 and 21 May 2018.
  11. The 2 February 2018 affidavit set out the factual background, parties financial contributions, purchase of properties and husband’s employment as (occupation omitted) of (employer omitted).
  12. The 11 May 2018 affidavit addressed the circumstances of the parties work at the Business A business and the signing of the Agreement. At paragraph 5 of that affidavit the husband states: (copied exactly)
  13. The 22 May 2018 affidavit corrected a mistake in the 11 May 2018 affidavit.
  14. In his outline of case filed 22 May 2018 at paragraph 2 the husband sought for the agreement to be set aside with costs for the following reasons: (copied exactly)

Procedural History

  1. This matter first came before the Court on the initiating application filed by the wife on 11 October 2016.
  2. I made Interim Orders in terms of the Minute of Consent signed by the parties on 16 October 2017 and listed the matter for final hearing on
    10 May 2018.
  3. In light of the wife’s application in a case filed 30 January 2018 regarding the enforceability of the agreement I made orders on 20 March 2018 vacating the 10 May 2018 hearing date and fixing the issue of enforceability of the agreement to a 1 day hearing on 24 May 2018.

The Relevant Parts of the Act

  1. Section 71A in Part VIII of the Act provides that:
  2. “Financial agreement” is defined in s.4 of the Act as:
  3. The expression “financial matters” is defined in s.4:
  4. Section 90B deals with pre-nuptial agreements and provides:
  5. A financial agreement becomes binding if s.90G is complied with.
    That section provides:
  6. In relation to the application seeking rectification of the agreement, the Court has power to make any of the types of orders traditionally made by courts of common Law and equity in relation to contracts by virtue of s.90KA, which provides:
  7. Section 90F(2) is also relevant. It provides:

Consideration

  1. The wife’s principal contention is that read in its totality and in particular by reference to its operative terms, the document evinces an intention of the parties to enter an agreement prior to their marriage in relation to property and spousal maintenance issues. The applicant points to the defect in the document in that the document fails to state that it is made under s.90B of the Act and thereby fails to comply with the definition of a financial agreement in the Act.
  2. As is noted in Senior & Anderson (2011) FLC 93 – 470 at [88] and [89], the term “binding financial agreement” is not defined in the Act rather, the Act refers to a “financial agreement”. Section 4 of the Act provides that “financial agreement” has two essential ingredients the first being that there must be “an agreement” and the second that there must be an agreement made under either ss.90B, 90C or 90D. Agreement is not defined and therefore carries its ordinary natural meaning and the principles of law and equity apply so as to vitiate the agreement if the relevant circumstances in order to do so are made out.
  3. In that case, all the members of the Full Court agreed that the agreement could be rectified in accordance with legal and equitable principles to correct references to s.90C to become s.90D (the majority were of the view that the agreement could not be rectified to cure a defect in the certification process). As noted above, that issue does not arise in this matter.
  4. It was therefore submitted by the wife that the ordinary principles of construction of a contract and rectification should be applied in order to rectify the agreement such as to make specific reference to s.90B and to sever those parts of the agreement which are plainly inapt. In particular that clause 17 should be rectified so as to provide that the parties agree that this agreement is governed by the Act and that any dispute arising from or in connection with the agreement shall be determined by the courts exercising jurisdiction under the Act.
  5. Both parties agree that the financial agreement as drafted is not a model of clarity and it plainly has not been drafted by a person specifically on notice of the legislative provisions governing Financial Agreements as defined by the Act.
  6. The document bears all the hallmarks of having been the subject of an internet search and then being downloaded and completed under the misapprehension that it complied with all the legal requirements to give effect to its terms.
  7. According to the reasoning of Strickland J and Murphy J in Senior & Anderson (supra), quoted by Young J in Sullivan & Sullivan [2011] FamCA 752 at [54]:
  8. In this case the agreement does not comply with ss.90B or 90C of the Act because it fails to state that it is made under s.90B of the Act and therefore fails to comply with the definition of financial agreement in s.90B.
  9. This raises two questions:
    1. Can the agreement be rectified to be a Financial Agreement; and
    2. If so, is it a binding agreement pursuant to s.90G of the Act?
  10. In Sullivan & Sullivan [2011] FamCA 752 Young J set out the relevant authorities and principles in relation to interpretation of and rectification of a financial agreement for the purposes of Part VIIIA of the Act.
  11. At [82] he made reference to ASIC v Fortescue Metals Group Ltd & Anor[1] Keane CJ, Emmett and Finkelstein JJ agreeing in support of the proposition that strive to uphold bargains:
  12. The role of the Court is to interpret contracts to give effect to their discernible purpose. The court also proceeds on the basis that where two constructions of an instrument are equally plausible, upon one of which the instrument is valid, and upon the other of which it is invalid, the court should lean towards that construction which validates the instrument: Caltex Australia petroleum Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2008] FCA 1951; (2008) 173 FCR 359 at [170]. As is noted in “The Interpretation of Contracts in Australia”, Lewison and Hughes at [7.15]:
  13. In my view, on the face of the document the parties intended that they enter into a binding enforceable agreement before their marriage in relation to financial matters. It is stated that the agreement will take effect “only upon the solemnisation of the marriage between the parties”. As the parties intended the document to be a binding agreement I accept the submission that the parties intended this to be an agreement made under part VIIIA of the Act and not an agreement that was a void prenuptial agreement.
  14. In my view rectification is available to cure what is plainly the legal nonsense created by clause 17 of the agreement in its current terms and rectification to make reference to the jurisdiction of the Act gives effect to the clear intention of the parties. I note the submission of the husband that the entitling of the document as a “Pre–Nuptial Agreement” may tend to indicate that is what the parties agreed here, however I am of the view that the parties intended to have an enforceable financial agreement and the use of that does not affect the substance of the submissions put by the wife. Similarly, rectification is available to amend the document so that it includes a reference to it being made pursuant to s.90B of the Act.
  15. The evidence of the husband does not suggest that it was not intended that there be an enforceable financial agreement between the parties that would give effect to the terms of the agreement reached.
  16. That the rectification is extensive is not a bar to the Court making the orders. The Court has the power to correct errors that go beyond minor verbal infelicities and errors of grammar and spelling: Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd [2009] UKHL 38; [2009] AC 1101 at [25]:
  17. I accept the wife’s submissions as to content of the document (set out at paragraph 20) above and am of the view that it can and should be rectified to make reference to s.90B of the Act and to rectify paragraph 17 as noted above.
  18. I do not accept the husband’s submissions, set out above in paragraph 2(g) of his outline of case, that the agreement is void and unenforceable due to uncertain and ambiguous terms. Adopting the language of Menzies J in Thorby v Goldberg [1964] HCA 41; (1964) 112 CLR 597 at 607:
  19. I will briefly address the husband’s submissions in paragraph 2(h) and 2(i) of his outline of case. In the former the husband submitted that the agreement did not account for both parties’ contributions to the acquisition, improvement and preservation of the properties and contribution to the welfare of the family. This fails on the basis that it is not for the Court to make good a bad bargain. Having rectified the agreement, the fact that the outcome is disadvantageous to the husband is not enough of itself to preclude the agreement applying. In the latter, the husband submitted that events after the signing of the agreement mean it is unjust and inequitable to rectify the agreement. Counsel for the wife submitted that the question of what property is the subject of the agreement is a matter for trial and I accept this. Therefore, the events referred to in 2(i) are a matter for trial.
  20. For these reasons the court will make the orders sought in the applicant’s application save that it will reserve the costs of the application to further hearing.
  21. The proceeding will be listed for directions hearing for appropriate orders to be made for the efficient conduct of the trial.

I certify that the preceding fifty-eight (58) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Judge McNab

Date: 13 July 2018


[1] [2011] FCAFC 19; (2011) 190 FCR 364

[2] Overturned on appeal but not on this point see Fortescue Metals Group Ltd v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2012] HCA 39


AustLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCCA/2018/1906.html