19 Oct 2012
PATTERSON V DAVISON HC TAU CIV 2012-470-572
- Citation
- openlaw-e9e8f1be_6d68_47de_9860_b37766a9d03a.pdf
- Court
- High Court
Appeal allowed because the Family Court judge erred in inferring an intention to defeat the respondent's rights from the evidence; a market-value sale by the company and the factual matrix amounted only to suspicion, not the requisite seriously arguable showing that the disposition was 'in order to defeat' the claimant's rights under s 43(1); accordingly the restraining order was unjustified and must be set aside.