Sfakianakis & Sfakianakis

The appeal in Sfakianakis & Sfakianakis was brought by the husband against a decision of the Family Court of Australia, which equally divided the parties' property and superannuation in accordance with section 79 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). The husband's appeal centred on the trial judge's application of section 79(2) of the Act, asserting that it was just and equitable to grant property adjustment orders in response to the wife's application. The husband argued that the trial judge's decision was flawed due to the wife's deceit and failure to meet her disclosure obligations, which he claimed should have resulted in only his application for property adjustment orders being considered.

The court found that the husband had abandoned two of the four grounds of appeal, leaving only two substantive grounds to be considered. The first of these related to the husband's contention that the trial judge erred in determining it was just and equitable to make property adjustment orders in response to the wife's application. The second ground was that the wife's deceit and failure to comply with her disclosure obligations should have rendered it just and equitable for only the husband's application for property adjustment orders to be entertained. The court found no merit in these grounds, affirming that the trial judge's decision was correct. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

In addition to dismissing the appeal, the court deferred the wife's application for costs until the parties had filed written submissions. The wife was required to notify the appellant and any other relevant persons in writing of the nature of the costs orders she intended to seek against them, and to notify the Appeals Registrar of her compliance with this requirement within 14 days of the decision. The form of the order was subject to the entry of the order in the Court's records.