MARELLO & MARELLO

The Family Court of Australia considered a property settlement and parenting dispute between Ms Marello (the wife) and Mr Marello (the husband). The parties sought orders adjusting their existing legal and equitable interests in various corporate entities and trusts, and also sought to resolve outstanding parenting matters concerning their three children.

The court was required to determine several legal issues. In relation to property, these included whether a lease within a corporate structure should be classified as a finance or operating lease, how two motor vehicles owned by a corporate entity should be valued, whether certain alleged debts of the wife and post-separation credit card debt should be included in the asset pool, and whether the husband's income tax assessment should be a joint liability or borne solely by him. The court also had to consider whether it was just and equitable to alter the parties' existing interests in property and, if so, what adjustment was appropriate, taking into account contributions and relevant factors under section 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). In relation to parenting, the court needed to resolve disputes regarding the specific arrangements for the husband's time with the children, holiday arrangements, possession of passports, international travel restrictions, and the eldest child's school.

The court reasoned that it was just and equitable to alter the parties' existing interests in property due to the voluntary separation, which brought to an end the common assumptions underpinning their property arrangements. The court assessed the parties' contributions as 55% in favour of the wife and 45% in favour of the husband. Applying this assessment, and further considering the wife's primary care of the children, her meeting of loan repayments on secured properties, and the parties' differing earning capacities, the court made a further adjustment of 5% in the wife's favour for section 75(2) factors.

The court ordered an adjustment of the parties' existing legal and equitable interests such that the wife would receive 60% and the husband 40% of the value thereof. The parties were directed to file agreed Minutes of Order within 28 days to give effect to this adjustment, and also to file agreed Minutes of Order concerning the parenting arrangements, including those upon which they had agreed at trial and specific orders relating to holiday time and the eldest child's school. The court stipulated that if agreement could not be reached on the Minutes of Order, the matter would be relisted for determination.