FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| NEWBOLD & CHADWICK | [2018] FCCA 273 |
| Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – Property settlement – wife’s unilateral removal and personal use of joint funds following separation – discussion of “add-backs” – whether use of monies “reasonable or necessary” – “Kennon” principle – whether family violence proven – spousal maintenance. |
| Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss.75, (2)(o), 79,(2), (4) Evidence Act 1996 (Cth), s.140(2) |
| Cases cited: Stanford & Stanford (2012) 247 CLR 108 Russell v Russell (1976) 134 CLR 495 Watson v Ling [2013] FamCA 57 |
| Applicant: | MS NEWBOLD |
| Respondent: | MR CHADWICK |
| File Number: | HBC 166 of 2014 |
| Judgment of: | Judge McGuire |
| Hearing dates: | 6, 7 & 8 November 2017 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 8 November 2017 |
| Delivered at: | Burnie |
| Delivered on: | 14 February 2018 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | Mr M Trezise |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Dobson Mitchell & Allport |
| Counsel for the Respondent: | Ms K Mooney |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Waterson Legal |
ORDERS
That from the monies held on behalf of the parties by Pepperells Solicitors, agreed at $138,542, the husband be paid the sum of $85,602 and the wife be paid the sum of $52,940 and any interest accrued on the agreed sum be distributed in accordance with the findings of this Court generally as to the alteration of the property interests of the parties.
That in all other respects each of the parties be solely entitled to the exclusion of the other to all property in that party’s procession or control as at the date of these orders including but not limited to personalty and chattels, motor vehicles, balances of bank accounts and superannuation or pension entitlements.
That each party be solely responsible for and indemnify the other in respect of the following liabilities:
(a)any and all liabilities attaching to any of the assets to be retained by that party pursuant to these orders.
(b)any and all liabilities incurred by that party since separation in either joint names or in that party’s name alone;
(c)that the husband be solely responsible for the (omitted) Credit Card liability.
That the wife’s application for spousal maintenance be dismissed.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Newbold & Chadwick is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
| FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT HOBART |
HBC 166 of 2014
| MS NEWBOLD |
Applicant
And
| MR CHADWICK |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Applications
The wife is the applicant. She seeks the following orders:
(1) The net assets of the parties, as ascertained by the Court, will…
Continue reading Newbold and Chadwick
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Newbold and Chadwick [2018] FCCA 273
- Case
- [2018] FCCA 273
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the court were the appropriate alteration of property interests between the husband and wife, and the wife's claim for spousal maintenance. This involved assessing the contributions of each party to the marriage, their financial resources, and their respective needs and responsibilities.
Judge McGuire ordered that from the sum of $138,542 held by Pepperells Solicitors, the husband was to receive $85,602 and the wife $52,940, with any accrued interest to be distributed proportionally. In all other respects, each party was to retain sole entitlement to property in their possession or control, including personalty, chattels, motor vehicles, bank accounts, and superannuation. Each party was also ordered to be solely responsible for and indemnify the other in respect of liabilities attaching to retained assets, liabilities incurred since separation, and specifically, the husband was to be solely responsible for a particular credit card liability. The wife's application for spousal maintenance was dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
That from the monies held on behalf of the parties by Pepperells Solicitors, agreed at $138,542, the husband be paid the sum of $85,602 and the wife be paid the sum of $52,940 and any interest accrued on the agreed sum be distributed in accordance with the findings of this Court generally as to the alteration of the property interests of the parties.
2.
That in all other respects each of the parties be solely entitled to the exclusion of the other to all property in that party’s procession or control as at the date of these orders including but not limited to personalty and chattels, motor vehicles, balances of bank accounts and superannuation or pension entitlements.
3.
That each party be solely responsible for and indemnify the other in respect of the following liabilities:
(a) any and all liabilities attaching to any of the assets to be retained by that party pursuant to these orders.
(b) any and all liabilities incurred by that party since separation in either joint names or in that party’s name alone;
(c) that the husband be solely responsible for the (omitted) Credit Card liability.
4.
That the wife’s application for spousal maintenance be dismissed.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.