MEDBERRY & KALLOWAY

In this matter before Stevenson J, the wife sought property settlement orders pursuant to s 79 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), and departure orders in relation to child support. The dispute concerned the division of the parties' relatively small net asset pool, which had been significantly depleted by substantial legal costs incurred post-separation. The wife also sought to address financial events brought about by the husband's actions after separation.

The court was required to determine whether it was just and equitable to alter the parties' property interests and rights, and to consider the relevant factors under s 79 and s 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Additionally, the court had to assess whether the wife had satisfied the legislative requirements for child support departure orders, given the insufficiency of her evidence regarding expenses incurred in supporting the children.

Stevenson J found that the post-separation financial events caused by the husband warranted a contribution finding in favour of the wife. Applying the principles of *Stanford v Stanford* [2012] HCA 52, the court assessed the parties' contributions as at the date of trial to be 60 per cent to the wife and 40 per cent to the husband. An adjustment of 15 per cent in the wife's favour was deemed appropriate under s 75(2). Regarding child support, the wife's application for departure orders was dismissed due to insufficient evidence to meet the statutory requirements.

The court ordered the husband to pay the wife $191,500 within two months, and to cover her 2012 income tax liability, compulsory higher education loan repayment, and any refunds owed to Centrelink or the Family Assistance Office. The husband was also directed to provide authorities for payments from trust accounts and to indemnify the wife against liabilities arising from K Pty Limited, the L Trust, and the L Holding Trust. Furthermore, the husband was ordered to remove the wife as a beneficiary of the L Trust and L Holding Trust and was restrained from nominating her as a beneficiary in any future trusts or distributing income to her. Interim child support payments were to continue until a formal assessment or 1 March 2014, whichever was earlier, at which point the interim order would be discharged.