ASHLEY & ASHLEY

In the matter of ASHLEY & ASHLEY, Loughnan J of the Family Court of Australia made orders concerning the property settlement between the husband and wife. The dispute involved the division of assets, including real estate and funds held in various accounts, following the breakdown of the parties' marriage.

The court was required to determine the appropriate orders for the division of property, including the transfer of a property, the discharge of a mortgage, and the distribution of funds from a controlled monies account and a trust. The court also had to consider the implications of a potential default by the wife in meeting her obligations, which would necessitate the sale of a property. Furthermore, the court needed to address the sole right, title, and interest of each party in various chattels, investments, vehicles, and superannuation entitlements.

Loughnan J applied section 79 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), which governs the alteration of property interests in marriage settlement proceedings. The court found that it was just and equitable to make orders under section 79, noting the parties' long marriage of over 26 years and their contributions spanning more than 30 years. The court also referred to the principle in section 81 of the Act, which encourages final determination of financial relationships to avoid further proceedings. The orders made were designed to finally determine the financial relationships between the parties.

The court made detailed orders by consent, including the payment of a sum from the net proceeds of sale of one property to discharge a mortgage on another property. The husband was ordered to transfer his share of the latter property to the wife, who was then to pay the husband a specified sum and discharge the mortgage. Provisions were also made for the sale of the property if the wife defaulted on her obligations, with specific procedures for listing, sale, and auction. The net proceeds of any sale were to be applied in a defined order of priority. The orders also declared the sole right, title, and interest of each party in various personal assets and investments, and directed the realisation of their shareholding in a company, with the net proceeds to be divided between them. Finally, the court appointed the Registrar of the Family Court as an attorney to execute documents if a party failed to do so.