Hunt and Atkins and Ors

In the matter of *Hunt and Atkins and Ors*, Aldridge J made orders concerning the division of property and financial matters between a husband and wife. The dispute centred on the distribution of assets, particularly a property located at B Street, Town M, and the allocation of any surplus or shortfall from its sale. The court was also required to address outstanding debts and spousal maintenance.

The court was tasked with determining the method and terms of sale for the B Street property, including the appointment of agents and solicitors, and the valuation or reserve price for the auction. Furthermore, the court had to decide on the distribution of the sale proceeds, specifically the percentages to be allocated to the husband and wife, and how any shortfall would be managed. The court also considered the discharge of existing orders, the allocation of other retained property, and the substitution of the husband for the wife in relation to a debt owed to N Pty Limited.

Aldridge J ordered the husband to pay a sum of $174,747 to the wife within twenty-eight days. The court further directed the parties to take all necessary steps to sell the B Street property by public auction within four months, with provisions for agreeing on a price or obtaining a nomination from the President of the Australian Property Institute. The proceeds of the sale were to be applied first to sale costs, then to discharge any encumbrances, followed by capital gains tax, with the balance to be held in a joint account. Upon receipt of these proceeds, any surplus was to be distributed with 20% to the wife and 80% to the husband. The husband was to bear any shortfall and indemnify the wife against such liability. Other property in the possession of each party was to be retained absolutely. Existing orders for spousal maintenance and concerning the B Street property were discharged upon completion of the sale. The court also ordered N Pty Limited to substitute the husband for the wife in respect of certain debts. All applications and cross-applications were dismissed, and all material produced on subpoena was to be returned.