MITZOU & ROUBANIS

In the matter of *Mitzou & Roubanis*, Berman J of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia considered final property orders in circumstances where the wife was bankrupt and had failed to participate in the proceedings, despite leave having been granted for her to do so. The Court ordered that the matter proceed on an undefended basis.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the proposed property settlement was just and equitable, and how to address the parties' financial position where their liabilities substantially exceeded their assets. The husband sought to retain control of the parties' business and proposed to accept all business liabilities, with the wife transferring all her shares in the business to him.

Berman J reasoned that it was just and equitable for the husband to retain control of the business, given his willingness to assume the associated liabilities. The Court applied the principles of making just and equitable property settlements under the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), considering the parties' financial circumstances and the wife's non-participation. The Court made orders for the wife to be removed from her positions in various trusts and for her interests in those trusts and associated companies to vest in the husband. The husband was ordered to indemnify the wife against all debts and liabilities of himself and the various trusts and companies. The parties were to retain their separate property, and a Registrar was empowered to sign documents to give effect to the orders if a party refused or neglected to do so.