Al-Sadikh and Al-Sadikh

In the Family Court of Australia at Sydney, Judicial Registrar Loughnan presided over a property settlement dispute between Mrs Al-Sadikh (the wife) and Mr Al-Sadikh (the husband). The parties, married for over 33 years, were unable to reach an agreement regarding the division of their assets. The wife sought orders for the transfer of the husband's interest in the C property to her, a significant financial payment from the husband, and for him to be declared the sole owner of a property in Lebanon. The husband sought the transfer of his interest in the C property to the wife, with the wife simultaneously paying him a substantial sum, and outlined terms for the sale of the C property should payment default occur.

The court was required to determine several contentious issues, including the valuation and division of the parties' inheritances, particularly the Lebanese property, the extent of the husband's undisclosed funds in Lebanese bank accounts, the parties' respective financial and non-financial contributions throughout the marriage, their capacity for future employment, their future needs, and the impact of any prior non-compliance with court orders. The court also had to consider the wife's significant compensation payout from a car accident and the husband's alleged gambling losses.

Judicial Registrar Loughnan reasoned that due to the unsatisfactory and often contradictory evidence presented by both parties, particularly concerning financial disclosures and the origins of funds, it was not possible to make definitive findings on all disputed matters. The court adopted a global approach to assessing contributions to non-superannuation assets, finding them to be equal between the parties, while treating the wife's superannuation separately, to which she was solely entitled. The court identified the net value of the non-superannuation assets as $1,441,474.24. Applying an equal division, each party was entitled to $720,737.12 from this pool.

The final orders reflected an equitable distribution, acknowledging the wife's retention of the C property, valued at $645,000. To achieve the equal division, the wife was ordered to pay the husband $11,500, a figure adjusted to account for a $1,500 debt owed by the husband to the wife for legal fees related to the Lebanese property valuation. The husband was also to have his passport released. Other property and chattels were to remain with the party in possession, with specific provisions for bank accounts, insurance policies, and superannuation entitlements.