HOU & YING

In the Family Court of Australia, Justice Loughnan considered a property dispute between Mr. Hou and Ms. Ying, who were married for eight years and had one child. Both parties sought orders for the division of their property. The former matrimonial home was acquired by the husband prior to the marriage. The husband had made greater financial contributions during the marriage, while the wife made greater contributions as homemaker and parent. The court adopted a two-pool approach for superannuation and non-superannuation assets, assessing contributions for superannuation assets at 80 per cent in favour of the husband and for non-superannuation assets at 75 per cent in favour of the husband. The wife had primary care of the child, and the husband possessed a higher earning capacity.

The court was required to determine the appropriate division of the parties' property, taking into account their respective contributions, the needs of the child, and their future earning capacities. Additionally, the court had to consider the husband's application for leave to re-open the proceedings to adduce further evidence.

Justice Loughnan dismissed the husband's application to re-open the proceedings, finding that he had not established that the additional evidence would likely alter the outcome or that its admission was so material as to require it in the interests of justice, referencing the principles in *Summitt & Summitt and Ors (Re-opening)*. In relation to the property division, the court reasoned that an adjustment of 10 per cent in favour of the wife was just and equitable, considering all relevant factors including her role as primary caregiver and the husband's greater financial contributions and earning capacity.

The court ordered the husband to pay the wife a sum of $381,498 within three months. In default of this payment, the husband was to take all necessary steps to sell the Suburb F property, with the net proceeds to be disbursed with 32.9 per cent to the wife, followed by the discharge of any secured amounts, and the balance to the husband. The court also made orders regarding the closure of a joint bank account and the splitting of the husband's superannuation interests in H Super, with leave granted to the wife to restore proceedings for a final splitting order. Otherwise, the parties were to retain assets and liabilities in their respective names.