McCrae & McCrae

In *McCrae & McCrae*, heard by May J, the wife appealed a property settlement decision made by a Federal Magistrate. The central dispute concerned whether certain monies received by the husband, specifically an inheritance and a damages award, should have been included in the asset pool for division, and whether an adjustment under section 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) should have been made in the wife's favour, given the husband's superior financial position post-separation.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the trial judge erred in excluding the inheritance and damages award from the property division, and consequently, whether the court should have made a greater adjustment in the wife's favour under section 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) to account for the disparity in the parties' financial positions.

May J dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's discretionary judgment. The reasoning, though not detailed in the provided text, implicitly upheld the Magistrate's decision regarding the exclusion of the specific funds and the extent of any adjustment. The court applied principles of family law property division, which involve discretionary judgments based on the specific facts and circumstances of each case, including consideration of contributions, financial resources, and future needs.

The appeal was dismissed. The appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to a specific application and hearing fixed at $2,200.00, with no further order as to the costs of the appeal itself.