Constable v Bell

The matter of Constable v Bell involved a dispute between the parties regarding the division of assets following the termination of their de facto relationship. The case was heard in the Family Court of Australia. The primary issue before the court was whether an adjusting order under section 20(1) of the Property (Relationships) Act 1984 was appropriate in light of the de facto wife's significant contributions to the relationship and her de facto husband's business, despite the majority of assets being held in his name.

The court had to consider the length and nature of the relationship, the role of the de facto wife as a homemaker and parent, and her contributions to the de facto husband's business. It also needed to determine whether an order for an adjusting payment was warranted and, if so, the amount and form of such payment. The court's task was to balance the statutory presumption of equal sharing of property with the actual contributions made by each party during the relationship.

In delivering the judgment, the court recognised the de facto wife's substantial role in the relationship, acknowledging her contributions as a homemaker and parent, as well as her indirect contributions to the de facto husband's business. The court found that despite the statutory presumption of equal sharing, an adjusting order was necessary to address the disparity between the parties' contributions and the distribution of assets. The court ordered a lump sum payment to the de facto wife, which it deemed appropriate given the circumstances. The decision affirmed that such an order was not a matter of principle but rather a matter of ensuring just and equitable outcomes in the division of property following the end of a de facto relationship.