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

Arti­fi­cial Intel­li­gence Fol­ly Called Out by Fair Work Commission

In the recent Fair Work Com­mis­sion deci­sion Mr Bran­den Dey­sel v Elec­tra Lift Co.[2025] FWC 2289, Deputy Pres­i­dent Slevin applied a crit­i­cal…

Assess­ing Scope 3 Emis­sions: An analy­sis of the impli­ca­tions of Den­man Aberdeen Muswell­brook Scone Healthy Envi­ron­ment Group Inc v MACH Ener­gy Aus­tralia Pty Ltd [2025] NSW­CA 163 (the Mount Pleas­ant decision)

Intro­duc­tionOn July 24, 2025, the New South Wales Court of Appeal (NSW­CA) deliv­ered a land­mark rul­ing in Den­man Aberdeen Muswell­brook Scone…

Work­place Rela­tion­ships: The Legal Posi­tion (Cold­play Con­cert Edition)

The recent sto­ry of col­leagues (a Chief Exec­u­tive Offi­cer and Chief Peo­ple Offi­cer (CPO)) whose appar­ent rela­tion­ship was cap­tured on…

In the News

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, Fair Work warns lit­i­gants against using Chat­G­PT”, pub­lished in The Aus­tralian on 28 August 2025:

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, ​“Fair Work warns lit­i­gants against using Chat­G­PT”, pub­lished in The Aus­tralian on 2…

Con­grat­u­la­tions | Angela Har­vey & John Trinh for being recog­nised in 2025 Doyles Guide Rankings

We’re proud to announce that Angela Har­vey has been recog­nised in the 2025 Doyles Guide as a:Rec­om­mend­ed Lead­ing Estates Lit­i­ga­tion Lawyer…

Michael Byrnes appeared on Nights with John Stan­ley on 2GB and 4BC on 25 August 2025 to dis­cuss the legal aspects of work­place surveillance

Michael Byrnes appeared on Nights with John Stan­ley on 2GB and 4BC on 25 August 2025 to dis­cuss the legal…

Sign up for our Newsletter

*Mandatory information