Haseloff & Kormann

In the Family Court of Australia, Dawe J considered a property dispute between a husband and wife, where the husband's father and a business entity were joined as respondents. The wife sought to set aside certain transactions pursuant to s 106B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), alleging they were undertaken to defeat her claims.

The court was required to determine whether it was just and equitable to make a property adjustment order under s 79 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), having regard to the parties' contributions and the factors enumerated in s 75(2). Additionally, the court had to consider the application of s 106B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) in relation to the transactions challenged by the wife.

His Honour found that the parties' contributions were equal and, after considering the s 75(2) factors, determined that no further adjustment was warranted. The court also found that the transactions in question should be set aside pursuant to s 106B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The orders made included the transfer of the former matrimonial home and a significant sum of money from the husband to the wife, the contemporaneous transfer of the wife's interests in certain entities to the husband, and the husband's indemnity in respect of specific debts. Each party was to retain their superannuation entitlements and personal property not otherwise dealt with.