KEILOR & ADAMS

In the matter of KEILOR & ADAMS, Burr J of the Family Court of Australia determined property settlement orders following the dissolution of a de facto relationship. The proceedings were brought pursuant to the *De Facto Relationships Act 1991* (NT). The primary dispute concerned the division of the parties' asset pool and the inclusion of certain credit card debts in the calculation of the net asset pool. The court also considered the parties' respective contributions, noting that the husband's violent behaviour had made the wife's contributions more difficult.

The legal issues before the court were whether credit card debts should be included in the calculation of the net asset pool for the purposes of property settlement, and what division of the net asset pool would be just and equitable. The court was required to assess the impact of the husband's conduct on the wife's ability to make contributions and her capacity to manage financial obligations post-separation, particularly in light of her damaged credit rating.

Burr J reasoned that while credit card debts could be included in the net asset pool, the proposed orders were not just and equitable. The court found that requiring the wife to pay a significant sum to the husband and to assume substantial debt, which would necessitate further borrowing, was inequitable, especially given the husband's actions had impaired her credit rating. Consequently, the court ordered a 75%/25% distribution of the net pool in favour of the wife, reflecting a greater recognition of her contributions and the difficulties she faced. The orders also stipulated the division of specific assets and liabilities, including the L property, motor vehicles, personal effects, and various debts, with the wife to discharge several credit card liabilities and a personal loan.