Marklew & Marklew

In *Marklew & Marklew*, the husband sought the discharge of existing orders requiring him to pay child support and spousal maintenance, arguing that these payments had been made up to the date of the application. The wife, residing in America, did not participate in the proceedings and presented no evidence. The husband's financial circumstances had significantly deteriorated after the original maintenance orders were made.

The court was required to determine whether the husband had established grounds for the discharge of both the spousal maintenance and child support orders from the date they had been paid up to. This involved assessing the evidence presented by the husband regarding his changed financial position and the wife's non-participation.

Justice Austin found that the available evidence sufficiently justified the discharge of the spousal maintenance orders as from the date to which they had been paid. Similarly, the court was satisfied that the husband had proven his case for the discharge of the child support orders from the date to which they had been paid. The court applied principles relating to the discharge of maintenance orders, considering the husband's demonstrated need and the wife's lack of engagement.

The court ordered the discharge of the relevant spousal maintenance and child support orders from the date to which they had been paid. It further stipulated that the total amount of spousal maintenance and child support payable for the period up to and including the date of the orders was to be equal to the monies already paid, ensuring no arrears or overpayments remained. The orders also addressed the transfer of jointly held shares to the husband, with provision for the Registrar to execute documents if the wife failed to do so.