Quayle & Perceval

In *Quayle & Perceval*, heard by McClelland J, the parties brought before the Court applications concerning property distribution, spousal maintenance, and child support. The wife sought a partial property distribution of $12,000 to discharge a credit card debt. The husband was ordered to pay periodic spousal maintenance and to maintain the wife's private health insurance. The parties also consented to orders regarding child support for their two children, encompassing school fees, uniforms, extracurricular activities, health insurance, and tutoring. The wife's application for adult child maintenance was dismissed, with liberty to apply granted.

The Court was required to determine the appropriate orders for partial property distribution, spousal maintenance, and child support, considering the parties' financial circumstances and their obligations of disclosure. A key issue was the impact of the parties' failure to comply with their disclosure obligations on the Court's consideration of their respective claims. The Court also had to assess whether the circumstances warranted an order for partial property settlement prior to a final hearing, applying the principles outlined in *Strahan & Strahan*.

McClelland J applied the principles for determining applications for partial property settlement orders, which involve a procedural step to assess whether the Court's power under s 80(1)(h) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) is triggered, with the overarching consideration being the interests of justice. The substantive step then involves applying the provisions of s 79 of the Act, albeit with limitations as it is not a final hearing. The Court noted that a failure to make full and frank disclosure can lead to a robust view being taken regarding a party's financial position. The orders made reflect a partial resolution of the financial matters between the parties, with specific provisions for property distribution, spousal maintenance, and comprehensive child support arrangements.