MCGAREY & STANCATI

The Family Court of Australia considered property settlement, spousal maintenance, and parenting orders in proceedings between Mr McGarey (the husband) and Ms Stancati (the wife). The parties had two children, D and E. The primary dispute regarding property settlement centred on the valuation of the husband's interest in a unit trust, which constituted the only substantial asset. The wife also sought spousal maintenance, and the parties disagreed on the parenting arrangements for their children.

The court was required to determine the appropriate valuation of the husband's interest in the M Unit Trust, considering conflicting expert evidence that employed different valuation methodologies. It also needed to assess the wife's entitlement to spousal maintenance, considering her financial circumstances, her de facto relationship, and the principles outlined in *F & F*. Finally, the court had to make orders regarding the children's living arrangements and time with each parent, taking into account the recommendations of a family consultant.

In relation to property settlement, the court accepted the valuation of the husband's interest in the unit trust as $0, based on the net asset backing methodology favoured by the husband's expert. The court found that the business itself had no value and that the unit trust owed a significant debt to the husband's trust, which was unlikely to be repaid. Consequently, the wife was awarded 100% of the net asset pool, totalling $58,000, to be paid by the husband. The wife's application for spousal maintenance was dismissed, as she had not demonstrated that her financial resources, including those available through her de facto relationship, were insufficient to meet her needs, nor had she met the threshold under section 72 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Parenting orders were made in accordance with the family consultant's recommendations, establishing equal shared parental responsibility and a progressive increase in the children's time with the father.