Dengate & Kettering

This case concerns a property settlement dispute between Ms Dengate (the Wife) and Mr Kettering (the Husband), heard by Justice Bowrey. The parties had been in a relationship for approximately 36 years, commencing in 1983 and separating in December 2019. The Wife, who is 61 and in poor health with limited earning capacity, currently resides in rental accommodation and receives Centrelink income. The Husband, who is 66, has been involved in the ownership and renovation of investment properties and operates a small accommodation business.

The primary legal issues before the Court were to determine the just and equitable division of the parties' relationship property, including numerous real estate holdings, chattels, and financial assets and liabilities. The Court was required to assess the contributions of each party to the relationship and its property, taking into account factors such as the Wife's inheritances and her significant health issues, as well as the Husband's role in managing and deriving income from the investment properties post-separation. The Court also had to consider the Husband's stated intention to retain investment properties and refinance joint debts, and the Wife's claim for an equal division of the relationship property.

Justice Bowrey reasoned that an equal division of the relationship property was just and equitable. The Court applied principles of property settlement under the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), considering the length of the relationship, the financial contributions of each party, the Wife's non-financial contributions and her current health and financial circumstances, and the Husband's contributions and post-separation conduct. The Court noted that the Husband had received relationship income without sharing it post-separation and had unreasonably prevented the Wife from residing in a jointly owned property while he remained in the family home. The Court also considered the valuations of the various assets and liabilities, including real estate, vehicles, and other personal property, as well as superannuation and bank accounts.

The Court ordered that the Husband transfer certain real properties to the Wife at her cost. The remaining real properties were to be dealt with at the Husband's discretion, either by the Wife transferring her interest to him or by them jointly agreeing to sell the properties, with detailed provisions for the sale process. The Husband was ordered to obtain finance or use sale proceeds to discharge joint loan obligations. The Husband was also ordered to make a cash payment to the Wife to achieve an equal division of the total value of the relationship property, calculated after accounting for all assets and liabilities. The Husband and Wife were to retain specific assets and superannuation policies in their respective names.