FISCHER & FISCHER

In the matter of *Fischer & Fischer*, the wife sought an adjustment of property interests from the husband. The primary dispute concerned whether it was just and equitable for the court to alter the parties' interests in their respective property, including the husband's defined benefit superannuation entitlement. The application was heard by Judge Williams.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the wife had established that it was just and equitable to make an order altering the interests of the parties in their property. This required the court to consider the existing financial and non-financial contributions of each party, as well as future needs and other relevant circumstances. A specific point of contention was how to treat the husband's defined benefit superannuation entitlement within the overall property pool.

Judge Williams dismissed the wife's application. The reasoning for this decision, though not detailed in the provided text, would have involved a determination that the threshold of establishing it was just and equitable to alter the existing property interests had not been met. This implies that the court found no sufficient grounds to vary the parties' entitlements, likely after considering all relevant factors under the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth).

Consequently, the court ordered that the application of the wife filed on 28 April 2016 be dismissed.