ASHJAIM & GASPAR

In the matter of ASHJAIM & GASPAR, Judge Curtain of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia considered a property dispute between the Applicant Father and the Respondent Mother. The dispute arose in the context of the Father's unsuccessful business venture which generated cash flow issues, and the Mother's post-separation conduct, which included admitting to lying to the court and a lack of transparency and honesty in her disclosures.

The court was required to determine the division of property and liabilities between the parties, including the disposition of real property, various businesses, family trusts, and motor vehicles. Additionally, the court had to address concerns regarding the children's welfare and the potential for breaches of federal law, leading to a referral of papers to the Australian Taxation Office and the Attorney-General.

Judge Curtain's reasoning focused on achieving a just and equitable distribution of assets and liabilities, taking into account the parties' conduct and financial circumstances. The court ordered an injunction restraining the children from leaving Australia for two years, with the Australian Federal Police to place them on the Airport Watch List. In terms of property, the Mother was ordered to pay the Father a sum of money, with the real property to be transferred to her upon payment, or sold if payment was not made. The parties were to retain ownership of their respective businesses and associated debts, with specific indemnities outlined. The Mother was also to retain control of the family trusts.

The court further ordered that the Respondent Mother pay the Applicant Father $83,400 within 90 days. Contemporaneously with this payment, the Applicant was to transfer his interest in the real property to the Respondent, who was to indemnify him against the mortgage and outgoings. If the payment was not made, the real property was to be sold out of court, with proceeds applied first to sale costs, then the mortgage, then the outstanding payment to the Applicant with interest, and the balance to the Respondent. Pending payment or sale, the Respondent was to occupy the property and meet mortgage and outgoings. The Applicant was to retain his business and associated debts, while the Respondent was to retain her businesses and associated debts, including significant financial liabilities. The Respondent was also to retain control of the Gaspar Family Trust and the MM Family Trust. The court also imposed restrictions on the parties operating businesses within a five-kilometre radius of each other. Finally, the court ordered that copies of the judgment and orders be forwarded to the Attorney-General's Department and the Australian Taxation Office for investigation into potential breaches of federal law.