La Costa & La Costa

In *La Costa & La Costa*, the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia considered an appeal by the wife against a property settlement judgment made by a single judge of the Family Court. The dispute concerned the calculation of the net asset pool and whether the trial judge had erred in including certain liabilities and monies distributed to the parties. The appeal also raised questions about the meaning of an interim order distributing property and whether a significant adjustment should have been made in the wife's favour, given the husband's superior financial position post-separation.

The primary legal issues before the Full Court were whether the trial judge had erred in their discretionary judgment by: (a) including specific liabilities and monies distributed to the parties when calculating the net asset pool; (b) misinterpreting the effect of an interim order distributing property; and (c) failing to make a significant adjustment in the wife's favour under section 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), considering the disparity in the parties' financial positions.

The Full Court found that the trial judge had erred in the inclusion of certain liabilities and monies in the net asset pool, and in their interpretation of the interim order. The Court reasoned that these errors led to an inequitable distribution of property. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the husband was ordered to pay a sum to the wife. Both parties were granted costs certificates under the *Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981* (Cth).