Receivers in the Melis­sa Cad­dick case want to inspect 30 pairs of the dead conwoman’s shoes, some of which may be worth up to $12,000, a court has heard.

Michael Hayter, Insol­ven­cy Part­ner and the solic­i­tor act­ing for the receivers, said they were seek­ing access to Ms. Caddick’s sneak­er col­lec­tion, which was being held by her son and Mr. Koletti.

In terms of what is in dis­pute, and I know this is going to sound pet­ty, one of the mat­ters in dis­pute is 30 pairs of sneak­ers which are held by the step­son of Mr. Kolet­ti,” Mr. Hayter said.

I should say they’re not the nor­mal type of sneak­ers that I wear.”

One of the pairs, we’ve ascer­tained that it was pur­chased by Ms Cad­dick from Chris­t­ian Dior. And if in mint con­di­tion has a val­ue of approx­i­mate­ly $12,000. These sneak­ers may have sub­stan­tial value.”

Mr. Hayter told the court that the col­lec­tion was removed from Dover Heights home.

Jus­tice Markovic told Mr Hayter that he should to come to an agree­ment with Mr Koletti’s lawyers to inspect the col­lec­tion to ascer­tain their value.

Mr. Kolet­ti also took sev­er­al of Caddick’s dress­es when he vacat­ed their Dover Heights mar­i­tal home and had hand­ed back all but two, the court heard.

And Mr Hayter told Jus­tice Brigitte Markovic the receivers want­ed to inspect them and if they were of lim­it­ed val­ue, they could remain in Mr Koletti’s possession.

To read the full arti­cle click here

If you would like to repub­lish this arti­cle, it is gen­er­al­ly approved, but pri­or to doing so please con­tact the Mar­ket­ing team at marketing@​swaab.​com.​au. This arti­cle is not legal advice and the views and com­ments are of a gen­er­al nature only. This arti­cle is not to be relied upon in sub­sti­tu­tion for detailed legal advice.

Publications

AI Slop v Fair Work Com­mis­sion: The Scourge Continues

For all the talk of how extra­or­di­nary and trans­for­ma­tive arti­fi­cial intel­li­gence (AI) can sup­pos­ed­ly be, it con­tin­ues to be a scourge…

Nichol­son v Stra­ta Plan No 104042 –The Valid­i­ty of Debt Recov­ery Claus­es in By-laws

The recent NSW Civ­il and Admin­is­tra­tive Tri­bunal deci­sion in Nichol­son v The Own­ers – Stra­ta Plan No 104042 [2025] NSW­CATCD 20…

Prop­er­ty and Stock Agents Amend­ment (Under­quot­ing and Oth­er Agent Con­duct) Act 2026

The Prop­er­ty and Stock Agents Amend­ment (Under­quot­ing and Oth­er Agent Con­duct) Act 2026 (NSW) (the Amend­ment Act) was assent­ed on 2…

In the News

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, Is the News Bar­gain­ing Incen­tive and Office of AI the media’s last hope?”, pub­lished in HR Leader on 31 July 2026

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, ​“Is the News Bar­gain­ing Incen­tive and Office of AI the media’s last hope?”…

Michael Byrnes appeared on Mon­ey News with James Willis on 2GB, 3AW, 4BC and 6PR on 30 July 2026 to dis­cuss a recent Fair Work Com­mis­sion case deal­ing with an appli­ca­tion for a flex­i­ble work­ing arrange­ment to work from home (from 23:30 to 32:20)

Michael Byrnes appeared on Mon­ey News with James Willis on 2GB, 3AW, 4BC and 6PR on 30 July 2026 to…

Michael Byrnes appeared on McK­night Tonight with Robert McK­night on 28 July 2026 to dis­cuss the lat­est devel­op­ments in the pro­ceed­ings brought by Jack­ie O’ Hen­der­son against ARN (from 9:30 to 30:25)

Michael Byrnes appeared on McK­night Tonight with Robert McK­night on 28 July 2026 to dis­cuss the lat­est devel­op­ments in the…

Sign up for our Newsletter

*Mandatory information