Conrad and Conrad

In *Conrad & Conrad*, the Family Court of Australia considered parenting, property settlement, and child support matters between Ms Conrad (the wife) and Mr Conrad (the husband). The primary dispute involved the wife's application to relocate the children interstate, the division of assets and liabilities, and a departure from the standard child support assessment. The court was required to determine the best interests of the children in relation to the proposed relocation, the appropriate division of the parties' financial contributions and non-financial contributions to the marriage, and whether to grant departure orders for child support.

The court's reasoning on the parenting orders focused on the best interests of the children, as mandated by sections 60CA and 60CC of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). It considered the wife's proposal for relocation and the husband's desire for substantial and significant time with the children. The court noted a breakdown in the husband's relationship with one child but recognised the benefit to the other children of maintaining a meaningful relationship with their father. Crucially, the court assessed the wife's willingness to promote the children's relationship with the husband. In relation to property, the court acknowledged the husband's greater financial contributions and the wife's greater non-financial and homemaker contributions, finding that an adjustment in favour of the wife was warranted to achieve a just and equitable outcome.

The court ordered that both parties have equal shared parental responsibility for the children, who are to live with the wife. The wife was permitted to relocate the children's residence to within a 20 km radius of E Town, Victoria. Specific arrangements were detailed for the children's time with the husband, including alternate weekends, additional weekends, and half of school holiday periods, with provisions for travel and communication. The parties were ordered to sell their jointly owned property, with the proceeds to be applied to sale costs, outstanding rates, and then specific debts, with 98.9% of the remaining balance to the wife and the balance to the husband. The husband was to take sole responsibility for certain loans secured over the property and indemnify the wife in relation to them. The wife was declared the sole legal and beneficial owner of her superannuation and all property in her possession, and similarly for the husband. Finally, the court made specific orders regarding the husband's child support liability, including weekly amounts and responsibility for 80% of the children's independent school fees and private health insurance.