ELLIS & MURPHY

In the matter of *Ellis & Murphy*, Austin J of the Family Court of Australia considered parenting and property settlement disputes between the parties concerning their two children. The primary parenting dispute involved the mother's desire to relocate with the children to the United Kingdom, which the father opposed. The property settlement dispute concerned the division of various assets, including real estate, businesses, and superannuation.

The court was required to determine whether an international relocation of the children to the UK was in their best interests, and consequently, with whom the children should live and what parental responsibility arrangements should be in place. In relation to property, the court needed to make orders for a just and equitable distribution of the parties' financial resources, considering their contributions and post-separation financial conduct.

Regarding parenting, Austin J concluded that the mother should remain living with the children in Australia, thereby refusing the proposed international relocation. The court found that the parties' entrenched conflict rendered an order for equal shared parental responsibility inappropriate, and accordingly, ordered that the mother have sole parental responsibility. The children were ordered to live with the mother and spend substantial time with the father, with provisions for international holidays. In the property settlement, the court found the parties' financial and non-financial contributions to be equivalent, with the father's post-separation contributions redressing any initial imbalance. Consequently, the non-superannuation assets were to be divided 60 per cent in favour of the mother and 40 per cent in favour of the father. The father was ordered to pay the mother a sum of $225,822, and specific orders were made regarding the sale of a business and the division of its proceeds, as well as the ownership of other assets.