LONGWORTH & DEANE
Case
•
[2017] FamCA 870
•3 November 2017
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
LONGWORTH & DEANE [2017] FamCA 870
[2017] FamCA 870
3 November 2017
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of *Longworth & Deane*, Rees J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the wife for an adjustment of property interests. The parties, aged 65 and 59 respectively, had been in a relationship for 11 years and married for three years, with no children of the relationship. The court noted that debts asserted by the wife to third parties would not be pursued, and that each party's paid legal fees were added back to the property pool.
The primary legal issues before the court were the appropriate division of the parties' property pool, including the consideration of section 75(2) factors, and whether the wife's contributions were made more onerous by reason of family violence. The court was required to determine if the circumstances met the exceptional threshold established in *Kennon & Kennon* for such a consideration.
Rees J found that the parties had contributed equally during the relationship. The court determined that the case was not exceptional enough to warrant an adjustment under *Kennon & Kennon* due to family violence. Applying section 75(2) factors, the court made an adjustment of 2.5 per cent in favour of the husband, reflecting the wife's greater future earning capacity. This resulted in an overall property adjustment of 52.5 per cent to the husband and 47.5 per cent to the wife.
The court ordered that within 28 days, the husband pay the wife $161,243 by way of property settlement. Simultaneously, the wife was to transfer her interest in the property at B Street, C Town to the husband, and the husband was to discharge the mortgage over the property and procure the wife's release from that obligation. The wife was also to transfer her interest in certain bank accounts and shares to the husband. In the event the husband failed to make the payment by the due date, the parties were to sell the property, with proceeds to be disbursed in a specified priority order, including payment of the sum owed to the wife with interest. Otherwise, each party was to retain property in their possession.
The primary legal issues before the court were the appropriate division of the parties' property pool, including the consideration of section 75(2) factors, and whether the wife's contributions were made more onerous by reason of family violence. The court was required to determine if the circumstances met the exceptional threshold established in *Kennon & Kennon* for such a consideration.
Rees J found that the parties had contributed equally during the relationship. The court determined that the case was not exceptional enough to warrant an adjustment under *Kennon & Kennon* due to family violence. Applying section 75(2) factors, the court made an adjustment of 2.5 per cent in favour of the husband, reflecting the wife's greater future earning capacity. This resulted in an overall property adjustment of 52.5 per cent to the husband and 47.5 per cent to the wife.
The court ordered that within 28 days, the husband pay the wife $161,243 by way of property settlement. Simultaneously, the wife was to transfer her interest in the property at B Street, C Town to the husband, and the husband was to discharge the mortgage over the property and procure the wife's release from that obligation. The wife was also to transfer her interest in certain bank accounts and shares to the husband. In the event the husband failed to make the payment by the due date, the parties were to sell the property, with proceeds to be disbursed in a specified priority order, including payment of the sum owed to the wife with interest. Otherwise, each party was to retain property in their possession.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Equity & Trusts
Legal Concepts
-
Remedies
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
LONGWORTH & DEANE [2017] FamCA 870
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
2
Statutory Material Cited
2
O'Brien v McKean
[1968] HCA 58
Ivanovic v Ivanovic
[1996] HCATrans 365