Conrad and Conrad & Anor

The case of *Conrad and Conrad & Anor* involved disputes between an applicant wife and a first respondent husband concerning property adjustment and spousal maintenance, with a second respondent sister also involved in relation to certain trusts. The primary dispute centred on whether three discretionary trusts constituted financial resources of the husband, and thus should be included in the property pool for division. Further disagreements related to alleged debts owed by the parties to the trusts, and the nature of the husband's interest in property jointly purchased with his sister. The credibility of the husband and his sister was a significant factor in the court's determination.

The court was required to determine the extent to which the husband's interests in the three discretionary trusts should be considered financial resources for the purpose of property adjustment orders. Additionally, the court had to resolve disputes regarding the husband's and his sister's roles and respective interests in these trusts, as well as the husband's interest in jointly held property. The court also considered an application by the husband to discharge, suspend, or vary existing interim spousal maintenance orders, and whether ongoing spousal maintenance was justified.

Forrest J applied principles of family law concerning the identification and valuation of financial resources, noting that caution was warranted when assessing the evidence of the husband and his sister, even when supported by contemporaneous records. The court found it just and equitable to divide the net property pool 55 per cent in favour of the applicant wife and 45 per cent to the first respondent husband. The husband's application to vary or discharge the spousal maintenance order was dismissed, with the court finding he had the capacity to meet his obligations. The husband was ordered to pay the wife $780,000 by way of property adjustment and to discharge all arrears of spousal maintenance within 45 days. Until these obligations were met, the husband was to hold his interest in the Suburb C property on trust for the wife and was restrained from dealing with it without her consent. Upon full compliance, the interim spousal maintenance order would be discharged, and various property transfers and releases would occur. The husband was also ordered to indemnify the wife against liabilities owed to his sister and certain entities, while the wife was to indemnify the husband against liabilities owed to her family and financial institutions.