Lindsay and Lindsay

This matter concerned the distribution of property and superannuation interests between a husband and wife, as determined by Judge Neville. The dispute involved the division of proceeds from the sale of real estate, an insurance claim relating to a truck, and significant superannuation entitlements held by the husband in multiple superannuation funds. The court also addressed the allocation of outstanding debts.

The primary legal issues before the court were how to equitably divide the parties' assets and liabilities, particularly the husband's superannuation interests, and to make binding orders in relation to these divisions. This included determining the specific percentages of various asset pools to be allocated to each party and ensuring that the orders were enforceable against the trustees of the superannuation funds. The court was also required to consider the implications of the *Family Law Act 1975* and the *Family Law (Superannuation) Regulations 2001* in relation to superannuation splitting.

The court ordered that the proceeds of sale from the parties' real estate be distributed with 60% of the balance to the wife and 40% to the husband, after payment of school fees. The husband was also ordered to account to the wife for an insurance claim relating to a truck and pay her 60% of the amount received. Crucially, the court made detailed orders binding the trustees of several superannuation funds, allocating specific percentages of the husband's superannuation entitlements to the wife. These allocations varied between the funds, with some being 60% and others 50% of the husband's entitlements less taxation. The court also ordered that outstanding debts to Telstra, Bigpond, and for electricity be borne 60% by the husband and 40% by the wife. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs. The court also noted that the parties have equal shared parental responsibility for their children, who live with the mother, with the father spending time with them as agreed.