AHOKAS & AHOKAS

In the matter of AHOKAS & AHOKAS, Justice Austin of the Family Court of Australia considered parenting and property settlement disputes between the parties concerning their three children. The parenting dispute involved determining the children's living arrangements and time spent with each parent, while the property dispute concerned the division of various assets, including company shareholdings and real estate.

The court was required to determine whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility, as stipulated by the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), was rebutted in favour of the children's best interests. Specifically, the court had to decide if it was in the children's best interests for them to live with both parents on an equal time basis. In relation to property, the court needed to assess the parties' contributions, both initial and during the relationship, and consider any necessary adjustments based on factors such as earning capacity and the retention of company shareholdings in specie.

Justice Austin found that while equal shared parental responsibility was appropriate, it was not in the children's best interests for them to live with each parent equally. Consequently, the children were ordered to live with the mother and spend substantial and significant time with the father, with detailed provisions for their time with each parent. In the property settlement, the court assessed the contribution-based entitlements at 55/45 in favour of the mother, taking into account her greater initial contributions. Despite the father's significantly greater earning capacity, the court ordered an adjustment in favour of the mother by way of a lump sum payment rather than a percentage proportion of the property. The parties' respective shareholdings in V Pty Ltd and H Investments Pty Ltd were retained in specie, and other assets and liabilities were divided accordingly.