Rogers and Watson

This matter came before Young J concerning the financial relationship between the Husband and Wife. The dispute involved the division of various assets, including real property in Queensland and Victoria, a taxi licence, and interests in trusts, as well as the discharge of mortgages and indemnities. The parties sought to resolve these matters by consent.

The court was required to determine the terms of a consent order that would finally determine the financial relationship between the parties pursuant to section 81 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This involved specifying the division of property, including monetary payments, the transfer of real estate and a taxi licence, the discharge of mortgages, and the allocation of liabilities and indemnities. The orders also addressed the parties' respective entitlements to other property and superannuation.

The court made orders by consent, discharging previous orders and detailing the financial settlement. The Husband was ordered to pay the Wife a total of $290,000 within specified timeframes. The Husband was also required to transfer his interest in the Queensland property to the Wife and discharge the associated mortgage, while indemnifying the Wife against accrued liabilities. The Husband and Wife were to transfer the Victorian properties to the Wife, with the Husband to discharge the associated mortgage and indemnify the Wife against accrued liabilities, though the Wife was to bear the stamp duty for this transfer. The Husband was also to transfer his interest in a taxi licence to the Wife. The Wife was to forego any claim to the Watson Family Trust and the Watson Property Unit Trust. The parties were to withdraw monies held in trust, with the Husband to retain the proceeds. The Husband was to retain specific properties and a company, while the Wife's superannuation was to vest with the Husband. The orders stipulated that each party would be solely entitled to other property in their possession, with specific provisions for insurance policies, liabilities, joint tenancies, tax liabilities, and superannuation entitlements. The orders were made pursuant to section 77(A) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), with a portion of the property retained by the Wife attributable to maintenance. All extant applications were dismissed, and the proceedings were removed from the docket. The court noted that the parties agreed the Victorian properties were part of the asset pool, the Husband warranted he did not require third-party consent for the orders, and the orders aimed to finally determine the financial relationship between the parties.