PANAGAKOS & PANAGAKOS

In the matter of *Panagakos & Panagakos*, Loughnan J of the Family Court of Australia considered a dispute concerning the division of property between a husband and wife. The parties had cohabited for approximately 17 years, during which time they lived rent-free with the husband's parents for over 13 years. A key aspect of the dispute involved the husband's father's valuable contribution to a home building project.

The court was required to determine the appropriate division of the parties' assets and liabilities, including a superannuation entitlement. Specifically, the court had to assess the respective contributions of the husband and wife, considering the significant contribution made by the husband's father. The court also needed to decide whether a superannuation split was just and equitable and, if so, the quantum of that split, pursuant to section 90MT(1)(b) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth).

Loughnan J reasoned that the husband's contributions to the relationship were greater than those of the wife. The court determined that the parties' non-superannuation assets should be divided equally. Regarding superannuation, the court found it just and equitable for the wife to receive 20 per cent of the husband's entitlement in his superannuation scheme. The court also ordered the wife to discharge mortgages on a property, pay a sum into a trust for the parties' children, and pay a significant sum to the husband, with the husband to transfer his interest in the property to the wife simultaneously. In the event of the wife's non-compliance, the property was to be listed for sale by public auction, with proceeds distributed according to a specified formula. The court also made orders binding on the trustee of the husband's superannuation fund, entitling the wife to 20 per cent of the husband's entitlement.