Holt & Foy

In *Holt & Foy*, the parties sought final property settlement orders from Coleman J. The dispute concerned the division of the parties' net assets, which had initially resulted in the wife receiving 37.62 percent and the husband 62.38 percent.

The court was required to determine the appropriate property division, considering the parties' contributions and various factors under section 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Specifically, the court had to assess whether any adjustments were warranted based on the disparity of entitlements, the husband's disclosure and evidence regarding his earning capacity, the husband's greater capacity to derive investment income, and other potential section 75(2) factors such as child support, the wife's earning capacity, and financial advantages derived from cohabitation. The court also had to consider the capital gains tax implications of the proposed property division.

Coleman J applied an asset-by-asset approach to the property division, referencing the principles in *Norbis & Norbis*. The court made an adjustment of $200,000 in favour of the wife under section 75(2)(o), citing the disparity in entitlements, the husband's inadequate disclosure and evidence concerning his earning capacity, and the husband's superior ability to generate investment income. No adjustments were made under section 75(2)(b) solely to "balance up" disparate entitlements, nor under section 75(2)(n)(a) as child support would be paid. Furthermore, no adjustments were made under section 75(2)(k) as there was no evidence that the wife's earning capacity had been adversely affected by her role as a caregiver, and no adjustments were made under section 75(2)(m) as the husband's financial advantages from cohabitation were not established.

The court made detailed orders regarding the transfer of property, including the G property and interests in the J Foy Family Trust, as well as the division of controlled monies. Each party was to retain their superannuation interests, and the wife was to indemnify the husband regarding income tax on interest earned by the controlled monies account. All outstanding applications, save for costs, were dismissed.