DELANEY & DELANEY (No.2)

This case concerned parenting and property disputes between a husband and wife, with the court required to make orders regarding the living arrangements and time spent with their four children, as well as the division of their assets. The parenting issues involved allegations of controlling behaviour amounting to family violence by the husband, claims of neglect of the children by the wife, and the weight to be given to the children's wishes. The property dispute required consideration of how assets that had already been dissipated should be treated.

The court was tasked with determining the most appropriate parenting arrangements for the children, specifically whether to order equal shared parental responsibility and an equal shared care arrangement, and how to address the husband's alleged family violence and the wife's alleged neglect. In relation to property, the court needed to decide how to account for dissipated assets when dividing the parties' overall property pool.

Judge Small ordered the discharge of all previous parenting orders and established equal shared parental responsibility for the children, with an equal shared care arrangement of living week about with each parent. Specific provisions were made for holiday periods, birthdays, and communication between the parents and children, including injunctions restraining abusive conduct and discussions of proceedings in the children's presence. In terms of property, the husband was ordered to deposit specific sums into the parties' mortgage account, and several properties were to be placed on the market for sale. The net proceeds of these sales, after costs and encumbrances, were to be disbursed with a specific percentage division, favouring the wife, after accounting for the wife's HELP debt and the cost of family reports. The wife was granted sole occupation of one property pending sale, while the husband was granted sole occupation of two other properties pending sale. Various other assets, including vehicles, shares, a caravan, an inheritance, and a business, were allocated to the respective parties. The court also made specific orders regarding superannuation entitlements, including a splittable payment to the husband from the wife's superannuation fund, and imposed obligations on the superannuation trustee.