ORMOND & ORMOND

In the matter of Ormond & Ormond, Judge Baker of the Family Court of Australia considered a property settlement dispute between a husband and wife following a long marriage. The proceedings involved the division of various assets, including real estate, vehicles, company shares, a unit trust, a motor vessel, a mooring, and interests in a superannuation fund. The court also addressed the discharge of an interim spousal maintenance order.

The primary legal issues before the court were to determine the appropriate distribution of the parties' property, taking into account their contributions and the factors enumerated in section 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975*, with a particular focus on the parties' respective capacities to earn income. The court was also required to make orders concerning the division of the parties' superannuation interests, including the allocation of splittable payments and the practical steps necessary to give effect to these divisions.

Judge Baker reasoned that a just and equitable distribution of the matrimonial assets was required, considering the length of the marriage and the contributions made by each party. The court applied the principles of property settlement under the *Family Law Act 1975*, including an assessment of future needs and financial circumstances. Specific orders were made for the transfer of various properties and assets between the parties, including the resignation of the wife as a director and the transfer of her shareholding in a company. The court also made detailed orders regarding the division of the Ormond Superannuation Fund, specifying the percentage of splittable payments each party would receive and outlining the obligations of the fund trustees.

The court ordered the discharge of the interim spousal maintenance order as of 8 January 2014. The orders provided for the transfer of specific assets between the husband and wife, the division of their superannuation interests, and the allocation of costs associated with compliance and the preparation of financial statements for the superannuation fund. Each party was to be solely entitled to property in their possession and solely liable for their respective debts and liabilities. The question of the respondent's costs was reserved.