A primary judge assessing hardship under s 205ZB(2) of the Family Court Act 1997 (WA) is not required to have evidence enabling a firm conclusion on the net equity of relevant entities; it is sufficient that the applicant demonstrates a prima facie claim worth pursuing which is not trifling. A complaint that the judge attributed too much weight to the available evidence, in the absence of more up-to-date valuations, goes to weight only and does not disclose an error of law. The Court left open, without deciding, whether s 205ZB is properly characterised as a leave provision rather than a time extension provision.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.