Arman & Arman

In *Arman & Arman*, the Family Court of Australia considered parenting and property division disputes between the parties. The case involved determining the best interests of the children, particularly in light of a family violence order and the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility. Additionally, the court addressed the division of property, including issues related to vague evidence of contributions and money received after separation.

The primary legal issues before the court were: first, whether to rebut the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility for the children, considering the impact of a family violence order and the parties' consent to certain arrangements despite denials of liability; and second, how to achieve a just and equitable division of the parties' property, including the "add-back" of certain funds and the valuation and distribution of various assets.

Cronin J determined that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility should be rebutted concerning major long-term issues relating to the children's education and health, granting the wife sole parental responsibility in these areas. For other major long-term issues, the wife would make the final decision if agreement could not be reached after written communication. The children were ordered to live with the wife, with specific time arrangements for the husband's contact, including a prohibition on alcohol consumption prior to and during his time with the children. The court also made detailed orders regarding the division of property, defining a "pool" of assets including the proceeds of sale of a property, another property, and vehicles, to be divided 65% to the wife and 35% to the husband. The husband was ordered to transfer his interest in one property to the wife, and each party was granted sole occupation of different properties pending the sale of one of them.