Application to transfer proceedings to High Court — relationship property proceedings — contracting out agreement — verbal variation of agreement — available remedies in the Family Court — specific performance — Property (Relationships) Act 1976, ss 1N, 21A, 21H & 38A — Family Court Act 1980, s 14 — Alloway v Bond [2015] NZHC 1113, [2015] NZFLR 579 — Debut Homes Ltd (in liquidation) v Cooper [2020] NZSC 100 — Booth v Booth [2019] NZHC 3445 — Fisher v Fisher [2015] NZFC 1285 — Fisher v Fisher [2015] NZHC 2693 — Royal Reed v Liu [2017] NZFC 4972. This hearing was to determine an application by the respondent to have the proceedings before the Family Court transferred to the High Court pursuant to s 38A of the Property (Relationships) Act ("PRA") and consolidated with proceedings already before the High Court. The parties had been married and had entered into a PRA, s 21A contracting out agreement, which the respondent sought to have enforced in the High Court. The applicant (the respondent in the High Court proceedings) filed a statement of defence and counterclaim and subsequently filed proceedings in the Family Court seeking an order for a verbal variation of the s 21A agreement pursuant to s 21H of the PRA. The reason the respondent had filed proceedings in the High Court was because she was seeking specific performance of part of the agreement (transfer of property), a remedy which was not available in the Family Court. In considering an application for transfer, a court must consider the complexity of the proceedings or of any question in issue; any proceedings before the High Court with the same parties; and any other consideration a court deems relevant to the circumstances. The Judge also took into consideration the principles in s 1N of the PRA. There was only the one issue for determination in the Family Court, whereas the application in the High Court pleaded five causes of action. The Judge noted that complexity of an issue alone was not sufficient to justify an order for transfer. However, there would be additional cost, time and potential prejudice to the respondent if the issues, which related substantially to the same subject matter, were to be heard in two different courts. The Judge determined it was in the interests of justice to grant the application and transfer the proceedings to the High Court, to be consolidated with the proceedings already before that court. Judgment Date: 19 October 2020.