Pavlic & Pavlic (No 2)

In the case of Pavlic & Pavlic (No 2), the respondent wife sought financial orders following the separation of the parties. The applicant husband, who operates a business in the building industry, and the respondent wife, who works in the transport industry, separated in November 2018. The wife sought various financial orders, including property settlement and spousal maintenance. The court was required to determine the nature and quality of the parties' contributions to their relationship, both financial and non-financial, and to assess their assets and liabilities, including superannuation. The court was also required to consider the relevant factors under s 75(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) in determining the financial orders.

The court accepted the parties' evidence that their contributions throughout their relationship were equal, with the husband as the primary breadwinner and the wife as the primary homemaker and parent. The court also accepted that their contributions post-separation were equal, with the wife obtaining employment and continuing to be the primary carer for the parties' adult children, and the husband continuing to operate his business. The court assessed the parties' assets and liabilities, including superannuation, and determined that there was no need for an adjustment under s 79(4) of the Act. The court also considered the relevant factors under s 75(2) of the Act, including the age and health of the parties, their income, property, and financial resources, and their capacity for gainful employment.

The court ordered that the parties' assets be divided equally, with certain exceptions, and that the wife be paid spousal maintenance. The court also ordered that the wife's outstanding taxation liability be paid from the parties' joint assets. The wife was also ordered to pay the husband's legal costs of the proceedings.

In conclusion, the court made orders for property settlement and spousal maintenance in favour of the respondent wife, while accepting the parties' evidence that their contributions throughout their relationship were equal. The court also considered the relevant factors under s 75(2) of the Act in determining the financial orders. The husband was ordered to pay the wife's costs of the proceedings.