POPOVIC & ROSSI

In the matter of POPOVIC & ROSSI, Judge Scarlett considered an application for settlement of matrimonial property and spousal maintenance. The dispute concerned the division of the asset pool, the parties' respective contributions, and the impact of a marriage of short duration. The court also addressed the issue of full financial disclosure by the respondent and considered the factors outlined in section 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) to determine if any adjustment to the property settlement was warranted.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant was entitled to spousal maintenance, particularly given that the maintenance sought was for a limited period until the completion of her degree, a period that appeared to have already passed. Furthermore, the court had to assess the appropriate property settlement, taking into account the parties' contributions and the specific circumstances of their short marriage, including any alleged lack of full financial disclosure by the respondent. The court also considered the procedural matter of appointing a Registrar to sign documents under section 106A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) in the event of a party's default.

Judge Scarlett dismissed the application for spousal maintenance. In relation to the property settlement, the court ordered the respondent husband to pay the applicant wife the sum of $45,145.00 within one month. Interest was to accrue on any unpaid portion of this sum at the rate prescribed by Rule 22.01. In the event of default in payment, the parties were ordered to sell the real property located at Property Y, [Y], Western Australia, by public auction within three months, with specific provisions for the appointment of an auctioneer, reserve price, and auction expenses. If the property was not sold within fourteen days of the auction, a second auction was to be arranged. The proceeds of the sale were to be applied first to sale costs and encumbrances, then to the payment of the ordered sum to the applicant, with any balance to be paid to the respondent. Pending payment or sale, the respondent was to meet mortgage instalments, rates, and taxes, and neither party was permitted to further encumber the property without consent. The court also appointed a Registrar to sign necessary documents if either party failed to do so within fourteen days of a written request. All other applications were dismissed.