MERRIGAN & Conlon

In this matter before Loughnan J of the Family Court of Australia, the applicant husband sought an order that the respondent wife pay him approximately $280,000 as part of a property settlement. The parties had lived together for approximately six years and ten months and had two children. The wife, conversely, sought no orders for property settlement.

The court was required to determine whether it was just and equitable to make any orders for property settlement under section 79 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), considering the contributions of both parties and the future care of the children. The court also had to consider the husband's child support liability and the costs of an expert accountant.

Loughnan J found that both parties had made significant contributions to the marriage. However, the wife's contributions were assessed as exceeding those of the husband, with the court attributing 55 per cent of the property pool to her and 45 per cent to the husband. The court also noted that the primary care of the children would continue to fall to the wife in the future, which would ordinarily justify a further adjustment of 5 per cent in her favour. Despite these findings, which would typically warrant a payment to the wife, the court concluded that it would be just and equitable to make no order for property settlement between the parties.

Consequently, the court ordered that there be no orders made under section 79 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The husband was also ordered to pay $33,750 to L Associates Limited within one month, and to discharge any arrears of his child support liability within the same period, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the parties.