MERRICK & DENARD (No.3)

This case concerned parenting and property disputes between Mr Merrick (the applicant husband) and Ms Denard (the respondent wife), involving two young children and allegations of family violence. The court was also required to determine an application for discharge of spousal maintenance arrears and a prospective spousal maintenance order.

The legal issues before the court included the primary considerations for determining the best interests of the children, specifically the benefit of a meaningful relationship with both parents, and how to treat "lay opinions" regarding asset valuations, including the "opinion rule" and "admissions against interest." The court also considered the waiver of evidence rules, agreements as to facts, allegations of sham transactions, dissipation of assets, and notional "add backs." Furthermore, the court had to assess contributions, future needs, and the overall justice and equity of the property division, as well as the grounds for discharging spousal maintenance arrears and the entitlement to prospective spousal maintenance.

In relation to parenting, the court accepted the observations of a family consultant that while both parents loved their children and had warm relationships with them, fundamental differences and discord had complicated their partnership. The court noted the father's frustration regarding time with the children and his inappropriate behaviour, such as public "naming and shaming" of the mother, which indicated a compromised ability to regulate emotions and was not child-focused. Regarding property, the court determined that the net pool was approximately $1,000,000, and ultimately ordered that the wife would receive 65% of the net pool and the husband 35%. The court also held the husband responsible for a $18,651.20 debt, deeming it his neglect of prior court orders, and stated it should not be a joint liability. The husband was ordered to pay spousal maintenance arrears up to 3 August 2020, with consideration given to a payment plan due to his earning capacity. The application for discharge of spousal maintenance arrears was not established, and entitlement to a prospective order was not proven.

The court made orders requiring the applicant to provide a proposed Final Order reflecting the Reasons for Judgment to the respondent and the court by 4:00 pm on 26 March 2021. The respondent was to provide any reply by 4:00 pm on 1 April 2021. The parties were directed to attempt to reach an agreed position on the wording of the Final Order by 4:00 pm on 15 April 2021. In the event of disagreement, the matter was to be listed for a Mention, with both parties to attend personally with their legal representatives.