SMYLLIE & SMYLLIE

In *Smyllie & Smyllie*, the wife sought an order for exclusive possession of the former matrimonial home, which was registered in her name. The husband did not contest this application. The wife also sought spousal maintenance orders against the husband.

The court was required to determine whether it was reasonable, sensible, or practicable for the parties to continue living together, and if not, to grant the wife exclusive possession of the property. Additionally, the court had to consider the husband's application for spousal maintenance, specifically whether he had proven he could not adequately support himself, and if so, to determine the appropriate quantum of maintenance.

Loughnan J found that it was not reasonable, sensible, or practicable for the parties to reside together, and therefore granted the wife exclusive possession of the Suburb A property, making her responsible for all associated outgoings. Regarding spousal maintenance, the court noted the husband's limited capacity to support himself due to a period of incarceration, and the wife's prior financial support of him during that time, as evidence that he lacked other means of adequate self-support. Consequently, the court made orders for both a lump sum and periodic spousal maintenance payment to the husband.

The court ordered the husband to vacate the Suburb A property within 14 days, with the wife to have sole occupation and responsibility for all property expenses. The wife was also ordered to pay the husband $26,000 net by way of lump sum spousal maintenance and $1,200 net per week by way of periodic maintenance, with specific conditions on the use of these funds. Further, the wife was to pay the husband $25,000 for the purchase of a motor vehicle within 14 days. The periodic maintenance amount was to increase to $2,200 per week after six months, pending further order.