DOBBS & DOBBS

Dobbs & Dobbs involved an appeal against a property settlement order made in the context of a divorce. The wife appealed, arguing that the trial judge's application of section 75(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) was flawed because the judge had incorrectly assumed that she would bear the burden of the child's private school fees. The husband countered that the trial judge had correctly identified the factors justifying a five per cent adjustment in the wife's favour, and that the wife was likely to have greater financial responsibility for the child in the future.

The court examined whether the trial judge had erred in fact or law by making the adjustment. The judge had considered the future financial responsibilities of the wife and concluded that the factors justifying the adjustment were present. The court found that the trial judge's findings were open on the evidence and that no factual error had been demonstrated. The wife's argument that the trial judge had made a mistake of fact did not succeed because the judge's assessment was based on a reasonable interpretation of the evidence.

In conclusion, the appeal was dismissed as there was no demonstrated error on the part of the trial judge. Additionally, the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of appeal, which were assessed at $15,000. This decision underscored the importance of the trial judge's discretion in considering the unique circumstances of each case when applying section 75(2).