ALLMAN & ALLMAN

In the matter of *Allman & Allman*, the wife sought interim property orders, including an interim sale of the parties' property, and interim spousal maintenance from the husband. The parties had been separated for approximately ten years, residing on the same property but in separate dwellings. The husband asserted, and it was accepted by the court, that he lacked the capacity to fund the property order sought by the wife. There was also contention regarding the wife's employment circumstances.

The court was required to determine whether to make an interim property order in the wife's favour, considering the husband's asserted lack of capacity to fund it and the disputed employment circumstances of the wife. Additionally, the court had to consider the wife's application for interim spousal maintenance of $500 per week, assessing the husband's capacity to pay and the wife's established need, particularly in light of the husband's health conditions and his responsibility for property-related payments.

His Honour, Watts J, found that it would not be appropriate to make an interim property order in the wife's favour, given the husband's lack of capacity and the contested employment situation. Regarding spousal maintenance, the court could not make a finding on the wife's employment and earning capacity at the interim stage. Furthermore, the evidence did not establish the husband's capacity to make spousal maintenance payments, nor was there sufficient evidence of the wife's level of need. Consequently, the court dismissed both the wife's application for an interim property order and for interim spousal maintenance. The costs of both parties were reserved.