Radic & Radic

This matter concerned an appeal to the Federal Court of Australia regarding property division orders made by a Federal Magistrate. The appeal was brought by the appellant, who challenged the Magistrate's findings concerning his earnings, the weighting of contributions, and the consideration of relevant factors under section 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The appellant also contended that the overall property settlement was not just and equitable.

The primary legal issues before the Full Court were whether the Federal Magistrate had erred in fact regarding the appellant's income, whether insufficient weight had been given to the appellant's contributions, and crucially, whether the Magistrate had failed to adequately weigh the relevant factors under section 75(2) of the *Family Law Act*. Additionally, the Court was required to determine if the finding that it was not unjust to notionally attribute undisclosed assets to the appellant was sound, and if the consequent orders were just and equitable as required by section 79(4) of the Act.

The Full Court found no appealable error in the Magistrate's findings regarding the appellant's income or the initial assessment of equal contributions. However, the Court determined that the reasons provided by the Magistrate did not demonstrate a proper weighing and assessment of the factors under section 75(2), and the justification for a 15 per cent adjustment in favour of the respondent was not evident. This failure to weigh relevant factors constituted an appealable error. Furthermore, the Court found the finding of undisclosed assets to be unsound, concluding that the overall property settlement did not satisfy the requirements of being just and equitable.

Consequently, the appeal was allowed. The Court also ordered that both parties be entitled to receive certificates under sections 6, 8, and 9 of the *Federal Proceedings (Costs) Act 1981* (Cth) in relation to the costs of the appeal.