Farmer & Bramley

The case of *Farmer & Bramley* concerned an appeal to the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia, presided over by Finn, Kay, and Guest JJ. The dispute revolved around the division of property, specifically addressing whether assets acquired by one party after the separation of the parties could be taken into account to satisfy claims arising from the marital relationship.

The central legal issue before the court was the extent to which property acquired by a party after separation could be considered in property adjustment proceedings under s 79 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This involved determining whether such post-separation assets could be used to satisfy claims for financial support, particularly in relation to child-rearing responsibilities or disparities in earning capacity stemming from the marriage. The court also considered the proper interpretation of the phrase "just and equitable" within s 79(2) of the Act.

The court reasoned that while s 79(2) imposes a limitation on the court's power to alter property interests, requiring any such alteration to be "just and equitable," this discretion is not unbounded. The court held that the concept of "just and equitable" should be understood in the context of the "circumstances of the marriage relationship" and its breakdown. Therefore, disparities in wealth arising from circumstances occurring after separation, and not connected to the marital partnership, generally fall outside the constitutional reach of s 79. However, an exception exists where post-separation assets can be drawn upon to meet needs that arose from the marital relationship and could not be satisfied by assets acquired during the marriage, such as ongoing child support obligations or a significant disparity in earning capacity resulting from the division of roles during the marriage.

The court allowed the appeal, finding that the trial judge had erred in considering post-separation assets without a sufficient nexus to the marital relationship or its breakdown, beyond the limited exceptions identified. The matter was remitted for redetermination.