MCGUIRE & MCGUIRE

Stevenson J made orders concerning parenting arrangements for four children and the alteration of property interests between the parties. The parenting dispute was limited to one night a fortnight, with the children expressing a desire for the existing arrangements to continue unchanged. In relation to property, the parties agreed their contributions were equal at the date of trial, but differed on the percentage adjustment of the former matrimonial home, with the wife seeking 25 per cent and the husband proposing 20 per cent. Both parties also agreed to a superannuation splitting order.

The court was required to determine appropriate parenting orders that reflected the children's views and the parties' circumstances, including equal shared parental responsibility. Regarding property, the court needed to decide what adjustment to the proceeds of the former matrimonial home was just and equitable, and to formalise the agreed superannuation splitting orders. The court also had to address outstanding applications and costs.

In making the parenting orders, Stevenson J discharged previous orders and made orders for equal shared parental responsibility, with the children to live with the mother and spend time with the father on an alternating weekend basis, with additional nights and specific arrangements for younger children until they reach 14 years. The court found it just and equitable for the wife to receive a 25 per cent adjustment of the net proceeds of the former matrimonial home, after payment of the mortgage, rates, sale costs, and commission. The husband was to pay the wife arrears of spouse maintenance from his share of the sale proceeds. Superannuation splitting orders were made for specific amounts from two funds.

The court ordered the sale of the former matrimonial home and the distribution of proceeds, with the wife receiving 75 per cent of the balance and the husband receiving the remaining 25 per cent. The husband was ordered to pay the wife arrears of spouse maintenance. Superannuation splitting orders were made, entitling the wife to specific amounts from the husband's interests in two superannuation funds. The husband was also ordered to indemnify the wife for school fees. All outstanding applications, except for a contravention application by the wife, were dismissed.