AYLING & JAGO

In the matter of Ayling & Jago, Judge Burchardt of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia considered a property dispute between a mother and father following a relationship of over 15 years. The primary dispute concerned the allocation of credit card debts accrued during the relationship and the division of the net proceeds from the sale of the former matrimonial home, with the mother seeking to resist a portion of the credit card claims. The parties had an autistic son who lived predominantly with the mother.

The court was required to determine how the outstanding credit card debts should be paid from the sale proceeds of the matrimonial home and how the remaining net proceeds should be divided between the parties. Additionally, the court needed to address the allocation of a specific superannuation amount to the respondent mother, as mandated by section 90MT(1)(a) of the *Family Law Act 1975*, and the mechanism for its payment.

Judge Burchardt reasoned that the credit card debts, having been accrued during the relationship, were to be paid out from the sale proceeds. Applying principles of property adjustment under the *Family Law Act 1975*, the court considered the substantial initial contributions made by the mother and her significant future needs, particularly in light of her primary care responsibilities for the parties' autistic son. Consequently, the court ordered that after the payment of the specified credit card debts, the remaining net proceeds of the former matrimonial home be divided 75% in favour of the mother and 25% in favour of the father. The court further ordered that a base amount of $35,391 be allocated to the mother from the applicant's interest in a specified superannuation fund, with provisions for future payments to be made directly to the mother by the superannuation trustee.