Calder & Calder

In the case of Calder & Calder, the husband appealed findings concerning the value of livestock, and the wife cross-appealed, raising various issues regarding the trial judge’s decisions. The central dispute involved the division of property following the dissolution of their marriage, including livestock, plant, and equipment. The Full Court was tasked with reviewing the trial judge’s approach to property settlement, particularly the valuation of livestock and the division of assets.

The primary legal issues before the court included whether the trial judge erred in adopting a two-pool approach without prior notice, the appropriateness of not dividing the livestock in specie, the adequacy of the trial judge’s reasons regarding the wife's post-separation debt, and whether the trial judge correctly adjusted legal costs. The court had to determine if the trial judge's decisions were sound and whether the Full Court could re-exercise its discretion to achieve a just and equitable outcome.

The Full Court found that while the trial judge did not err in adopting a two-pool approach without notice or in deciding not to divide the livestock in specie, the reasons provided were inadequate in considering the wife’s post-separation debt. Additionally, the court identified errors in the trial judge’s adjustment of legal costs, adding back some of the wife’s costs but not the husband’s. Consequently, the cross-appeal was allowed in part, and the appeal was allowed in part. Given the significant disputes and the need for further evidence, the Full Court decided that remitter was the only realistic option, as the evidentiary and practical difficulties could only be resolved by having the evidence tested at another trial.

The orders included allowing both the appeal and cross-appeal in part, varying the monetary amounts to reflect the correct values, and requiring the wife to repay a specific sum to the husband. The court also outlined a procedure for the parties to apply for costs incurred during the appeal and cross-appeal, ensuring that both parties could present written submissions and respond accordingly within specified timeframes.