Dalziel & Weinstein

In the matter of *Dalziel & Weinstein*, Coleman J of the Family Court of Australia considered a dispute concerning property settlement between the parties, who had cohabited and contributed to a business, subsequently separated but continued to contribute to the business, and then separated entirely with only one party continuing to contribute.

The court was required to determine the extent of each party's contributions to the marriage and the property, including a business, over different periods of their relationship and separation. Further issues included whether section 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) warranted an adjustment in favour of the husband, and the proper valuation of the business, including considerations of disclosure and accounting errors.

Coleman J found that the parties' contributions were equal during the initial periods of cohabitation and separation where both contributed to the business. In the final period of separation, the wife's contributions in running the business were favoured, though the husband's earlier receipt of funds and his greater contributions as homemaker and parent were also taken into account, particularly as the wife financially supported the child and the husband did not pursue gainful employment. Despite the wife's secure employment and greater superannuation, no section 75(2) adjustment was made in favour of the husband due to his failure to pursue gainful employment. The court also found that the business was not "run dead" and that full disclosure had been made, taking into account accounting errors and tax implications.

The court ordered the husband to transfer his interest in the company S Pty Limited to the wife and resign as director and secretary. The wife was to indemnify the husband for liabilities of herself and the company, with specific provisions regarding income tax on payments made to the husband. The husband was also to assign his leave entitlements to the wife. The parties were to assign any assets in their possession to the other, and the husband was ordered to file personal tax returns for specific years, including payments received from S Pty Limited, while the wife was to arrange for amended tax returns for the company. Costs were reserved.