BADAL & SHAH

This case involved applications for final parenting and property orders. The parties disputed arrangements for their five-year-old child, with the mother seeking sole parental responsibility and the child living with her, while the father sought equal shared parental responsibility and a gradual increase in time with the child. The mother also alleged family violence by the father. In relation to property, the dispute concerned the adjustment of interests under section 79 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), considering contributions and section 75(2) factors. The matter was heard by Judge Tonkin.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the child in relation to parenting orders, specifically addressing issues of family violence, past communication problems, and differing parenting styles. In the property proceedings, the court needed to make final orders adjusting the parties' property interests, considering their respective contributions and future needs.

In its reasoning, the court made findings regarding the allegations of family violence, noting that the mother alleged she had been a victim of family violence by the father, who denied these allegations. The court ultimately made orders for equal shared parental responsibility, with the child to live with the mother and spend substantial and significant time with the father, determining this arrangement to be in the child's best interests. For property, the court made orders adjusting the parties' interests at 63% in the wife's favour, finding no issue of principle arose in this determination.

The court ordered equal shared parental responsibility for the child, who was to live with the mother and spend substantial and significant time with the father, with detailed provisions for the father's time during school terms and holidays, including specific arrangements for birthdays and other significant events. In relation to property, the husband was ordered to transfer his interest in the former matrimonial home to the wife within sixty days, simultaneously with the wife paying the husband $132,766. The wife was to have exclusive occupation of the property upon settlement, and the husband was to vacate. The court also made orders regarding the distribution of proceeds if the property were sold, the transfer of joint bank accounts, and the division of other assets and debts, ultimately declaring each party to have sole right, title, and interest in property in their possession or standing in their sole names, subject to the specific orders made.