BENNISON & BENNISON

This case concerned property settlement and child support proceedings between the Husband and Wife. The primary dispute involved the division of the parties' assets and liabilities, including various properties, companies, and superannuation interests. A significant factor in the proceedings was the Husband's terminal illness and allegations by the Wife of undisclosed income and a deliberate failure by the Husband to make full and frank disclosure. The Court was required to determine how to adjust the parties' existing property interests under s 79 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), considering the Husband's health and the disclosure issues. Additionally, the Court considered an application for a departure from the administrative assessment of child support, given the Husband's willingness to meet private school fees.

The Court was required to determine the appropriate adjustment to the parties' property interests under s 79 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This involved assessing the parties' contributions, financial resources, and needs, particularly in light of the Husband's terminal illness and the Wife's allegations of non-disclosure. The Court also had to consider whether an adjustment under s 75(2) of the Act was warranted. Furthermore, the Court was tasked with deciding whether to depart from the administrative child support assessment under s 117(2) of the *Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989*, considering the Husband's offer to pay private school expenses.

In its reasoning, the Court found that a re-opening of evidence was necessary in the interests of justice due to the disclosure issues. The Court applied the principle that sale proceeds of assets sold post-separation could be notionally added back to the divisible pool of property in circumstances justifying such an approach. Given the inability to precisely quantify the Husband's initial contributions, the Court deemed a single pool approach appropriate for the property division, as neither party sought a different percentage division for superannuation and non-superannuation assets. Regarding child support, while the Husband was willing to meet private school fees, the Court was not satisfied that a departure from the administrative assessment would otherwise be just and equitable.

The Court made detailed orders regarding the division of property, including the transfer of the K Street property to the Wife, the Wife's relinquishment of interests in the Bennison Group of companies and trusts, and the division of superannuation interests. The Husband was ordered to indemnify the Wife in relation to certain liabilities arising from her involvement in the Bennison Group. The Court also ordered a specific split of superannuation funds and a base amount allocation from the Wife's interest in the Townsend Superannuation Fund to the Husband. Finally, the Court ordered a departure from the administrative child support assessment, with the Husband to pay the private school expenses for the children in lieu of assessed child support until his death.