CHARNICK & CORLES

In the matter of CHARNICK & CORLES, Judge Williams of the Family Court of Australia considered a property settlement dispute between a husband and wife. The wife sought an adjustment of property, requesting the exclusion of certain properties from the asset pool, which she claimed were sacred lands. She also sought to include alleged loans from her family in the asset pool. Additionally, the wife made a claim for periodic spousal maintenance.

The court was required to determine the extent of the parties' property interests, including whether the properties claimed by the wife as sacred lands should be excluded from the asset pool. It also needed to assess the wife's claims regarding alleged loans from her family and determine the appropriate division of the matrimonial assets and liabilities. Furthermore, the court had to consider the wife's claim for spousal maintenance.

Judge Williams reasoned that the orders made under section 79 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) would enable both parties to adequately maintain themselves. The court noted the husband's financial contribution to the support of his 15-year-old daughter. Regarding the wife's claim for a total and permanent disability insurance payout from her superannuation fund, the court found that while there was a prospect of a payment, it was unable to quantify the potential claim and that the wife had not voluntarily disclosed this outstanding claim. The court also considered that the wife's mother and/or sister had likely contributed funds to the wife during the relationship, but due to a lack of detailed evidence, definitive findings on these advances could not be made. The court acknowledged the wife's retention of two shipping containers and her continued use of the husband's ANZ credit card post-separation.

The court ordered the husband to pay the wife $22,500 within 90 days. In the event of non-payment, the husband was to sell a property identified as Property A, with the proceeds applied first to sale costs, then to discharge any mortgage, then to pay the outstanding amount to the wife, and finally the balance to the husband. Pending payment or sale, the husband was granted sole occupation of Property A, with responsibility for mortgage instalments, rates, and taxes. The court also allocated a base amount of $29,000 of the husband's interest in a superannuation fund to the wife, with specific provisions for future splittable payments. The wife's claim for spousal maintenance was dismissed. The orders further detailed the retention of various assets and liabilities by each party, including motor vehicles, bank accounts, and specific debts, and severed any joint tenancies.