GOODWIN & GOODWIN

In the matter of *Goodwin & Goodwin*, Mead J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications by the parties for the alteration of property interests following a marriage of 13 years. The dispute concerned the division of assets, including a farming property, with significant contributions made by each party's parents. The parties had separated five years prior to the trial, and their two children resided with each parent on an equal time basis. The husband had an expectation of inheriting part of his parents' farming enterprise, which remained actively farmed by his parents.

The court was required to determine how to achieve a just and equitable division of the parties' property interests, taking into account the contributions of each party, the contributions of third parties (specifically the parents), the future needs of the parties and the children, and the husband's prospective inheritance. The court also had to consider the nature of the husband's past involvement in his parents' farming operations, where he worked for a share of income rather than a fixed wage, and the wife's employment off the farm.

Mead J applied the principles of property settlement under the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), focusing on identifying the net value of the marital assets and then making such orders as are just and equitable. The court considered the direct and indirect contributions of each party to the acquisition, conservation, and improvement of the property, as well as their financial resources, needs, and the best interests of the children. The prospective inheritance was treated as a financial resource, albeit one with a degree of uncertainty.

The court ultimately made orders for the division of property, with directions for the parties' counsel to provide a draft minute of order to the Associate to Justice Mead within seven days. Further directions regarding the making of these orders were adjourned to 8 December 2020.