FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA HUNT & PLANEY

In the Family Court of Australia, Johnston J considered parenting and property settlement orders in a dispute between a husband and wife. The wife, originally from the USA and having resided in Australia for five years, sought to relocate with the child to the USA. The husband opposed this relocation and sought orders for the child to live with the wife in Australia and spend time with him. The wife suffered from a co-morbid disorder of major depression and anxiety, and a single expert opined that her mental state would remain compromised if she were unable to relocate. The husband accepted that the child's best interests would be met by living principally with the wife.

The court was required to determine whether the relocation of the child to the USA was in the child's best interests, considering the wife's mental health and the expert opinion. Additionally, the court had to determine the just and equitable division of the parties' property, including whether payments made by the husband to the wife after separation constituted spouse maintenance or interim property settlement, and to what extent adjustments should be made under sections 79 and 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth).

Johnston J reasoned that the best interests of the child would be met by allowing the relocation to the USA, acknowledging the wife's mental health concerns and the expert's opinion. In relation to property, the court found that approximately half of the post-separation payments to the wife were for spouse maintenance and the other half for partial property settlement. After considering the parties' initial contributions, the wife's contributions as a homemaker and parent exceeding the husband's, and other factors under section 75(2), the court determined that an adjustment of 10 percent in the wife's favour was appropriate, resulting in the husband receiving 90 percent and the wife 10 percent of the assets.

The court ordered that all previous parenting orders be discharged, that the parents have equal shared parental responsibility, and that the child live with the wife. The wife was permitted to relocate the child to the USA not sooner than 1 October 2013, with detailed provisions for the child to spend time with the husband both before and after the relocation, including travel arrangements and costs. In terms of property, the husband was ordered to pay the wife $205,143 within 60 days by way of property settlement, and to continue paying $500 per week in spouse maintenance pending this payment. The parties were declared the sole owners of all other property, and the husband was to indemnify the wife for liabilities in his name and his company's name. The application for a child support order was dismissed.