Knightsbridge and Knightsbridge

[2009] FamCA 694

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

KNIGHTSBRIDGE & KNIGHTSBRIDGE [2009] FamCA 694

FAMILY LAW – PROPERTY – INTERLOCUTORY DETERMINATION –
Contentious components of valuation of corporate entities and family trust – whether money advanced to respondent constituted over-drawn money that should be added back to the value of the trust – what rate of taxation should be applied to profits in the last financial year

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 79

APPLICANT: Ms Knightsbridge

RESPONDENT: Mr Knightsbridge

FILE NUMBER: CAC 1925 of 2007

DATE DELIVERED: 17 July 2009

PLACE DELIVERED: Canberra

PLACE HEARD: Canberra

JUDGMENT OF: Faulks DCJ

HEARING DATE: 9 July 2009

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Ms Tonkin

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Mrs Evans

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: No appearance

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr Nicholl

Orders

1. The matter is adjourned to me in Chambers at 9.00 am on 19 October 2009.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Knightsbridge & Knightsbridge is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT CANBERRA

FILE NUMBER: CAC 1925 of 2007

MS KNIGHTSBRIDGE

Applicant

And

MR KNIGHTSBRIDGE

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction    

1. This is an interlocutory determination relating to the disputed value of certain salary payments and consequent taxation treatment with respect to advanced money paid by the parties’ family trust to the respondent husband. Ultimately, my determination of these issues should clarify the total pool of assets of the parties, which is yet to be the subject of the primary dispute of the parties to s 79 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

Brief background

1. By way of brief background (as the finalisation of this matter has not yet occurred), the applicant wife initiated proceedings in the Federal Magistrates Court in October 2008.  The proceedings were transferred to the Family Court of Australia in April 2009.  The applicant wife is 47 years of age and has worked as a registered nurse. She states that she is not at present in remunerated employment because of chronic fatigue and anaemia. The respondent husband is 49 years of age and is a builder/carpenter.  The parties commenced cohabitation in 1987, were married in September 1988, separated in January 2006 and divorced in October 2007.  There are three children of the marriage.  They do not directly affect these proceedings.  

The orders sought by the parties

1. The applicant wife effectively seeks the right to retain a property at V in the ACT, her superannuation entitlements and certain parcels of shares and savings.  The wife also seeks the sum of $400,000 from the husband in consideration for the transfer of her right to a jointly‑owned property at B in NSW.  The wife also seeks orders effecting the transfer of her shares in one of the companies run by the respondent husband in consideration of a $200,000 payment.  The wife concedes that the husband should retain a property located at W, NSW, a commercial property in K, ACT, several corporate and trust entities, and…