Landon and Landon

In the matter of *Landon and Landon*, Judge Burchardt considered a dispute between a husband and wife concerning the division of their matrimonial home and other assets. The wife sought the urgent sale of the matrimonial home, with specific directions regarding its preparation for sale and the subsequent distribution of sale proceeds. The husband was ordered to vacate the property after a specified period, leaving chattels and fittings in situ.

The court was required to determine the immediate steps for the sale of the matrimonial home, including who would have authority over the sale process and the timeframe for the husband's departure. Further, the court needed to establish the priority of payments from the sale proceeds, including costs, the discharge of existing financial encumbrances, and the settlement of various debts of the marriage. The court also had to address the division of other assets, including motor vehicles and superannuation, and the allocation of specific liabilities, particularly taxation liabilities.

Judge Burchardt ordered the wife to have sole authority for the urgent sale of the matrimonial home, including selecting the real estate agent and signing necessary documentation. The husband was directed to vacate the property within 45 days, leaving all existing chattels and fittings. The proceeds of the sale were to be applied first to sale costs, then to remove caveats lodged by Harwood Andrews and the Australian Government Solicitor, followed by the discharge of the bank mortgage. Debts of the marriage, including unpaid school fees, a debt to "omitted Services," and credit card debts of both parties, were to be paid. The husband was specifically directed to pay certain costs and debts from his share of the settlement funds, including reimbursement for the removal of a caveat, rates arrears, and child support arrears, as well as the wife's legal costs from previous hearings. The wife was to retain a specific motor vehicle, while the husband was to retain another. The parties' superannuation was to be split 50/50, with an order for a superannuation audit of the husband's funds. Each party was to retain other property in their possession, with liabilities encumbering that property to be their sole responsibility. All extant applications were dismissed.