Rimmer and Sheen

This matter concerned an application by the respondent, Sheen, for an order that the applicant, Rimmer, pay her a sum of money. The dispute arose from a property settlement following the breakdown of the parties' de facto relationship. The application was heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the respondent had established a financial resource in the form of a discretionary trust, which ought to be taken into account when determining the division of the parties' property. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the respondent had a present entitlement or a future expectation of benefit from the trust, and if so, how that should be reflected in the property settlement.

Judge Newbrun reasoned that for a discretionary trust to be considered a financial resource, the applicant must demonstrate that the trustee has a real and not merely illusory power to distribute funds to the applicant. In this instance, the court found that the evidence did not establish that the trustee had such a power or that the applicant had any real expectation of benefit from the trust. The court applied the principles established in cases concerning the treatment of discretionary trusts in property settlement proceedings, emphasizing the need for concrete evidence of a realistic prospect of benefit.

Consequently, the court ordered that the discretionary trust was not to be treated as a financial resource of the respondent for the purposes of the property settlement.