LEDA & KOUROS

In the Family Court of Australia, Johns J considered a dispute between Leda (the de facto wife) and Kouros (the de facto husband) concerning property division following the breakdown of their de facto relationship. The parties had separated 12 years prior to the hearing and had a child together. A key jurisdictional issue arose as the de facto wife had not filed an opt-in document in accordance with the *Family Law Rules 2004* (Cth) to bring the matter within the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) pursuant to sub-item 86A of the *Family Law Amendment (De Facto Financial Matters and Other Measures) Act 2008* (Cth).

The court was required to determine whether it had jurisdiction to hear the matter, given the failure to file the opt-in document, and, if jurisdiction was enlivened, how the parties' assets should be divided. The parties' intention to opt-in to the jurisdiction and their continued participation in proceedings on that basis were central to the jurisdictional question. The court also had to consider the parties' respective financial and non-financial contributions, both during the relationship and post-separation, as well as the de facto husband's dissipation of assets through gambling and his limited future financial support for the child.

Johns J found that the parties had successfully opted-in to the jurisdiction under sub-item 86A(5) of the *Family Law Amendment (De Facto Financial Matters and Other Measures) Act 2008* (Cth), and therefore dispensed with rule 2.02 of the *Family Law Rules 2004* (Cth), enlivening the court's jurisdiction. In relation to property division, the court acknowledged the de facto husband's greater initial financial contributions and the de facto wife's greater non-financial contributions. The court ordered a division of assets of 53/47 in favour of the de facto husband, taking into account his dissipation of assets and the wife's contributions. The orders also addressed the transfer of property, the application of sale proceeds to child support arrears, the exclusion of claims to each other's property and superannuation, and the husband's liability for the wife's costs.