South Australian Superannuation Board and Hunter & Anor

The proceedings before Strickland J in the Family Court of Australia concerned an application by a wife to set aside previous property settlement orders made by consent, pursuant to section 79A of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). These prior orders had provided for the husband's superannuation interests to vest absolutely in him. The husband and wife had not divorced, and the husband subsequently died while in receipt of a pension from the South Australian Superannuation Board. The wife's claim for widow's entitlements from the Board was refused due to the existence of a splitting instrument. The South Australian Superannuation Board sought leave to intervene or be joined as a party, asserting an interest in and that it would be affected by any further orders made.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the South Australian Superannuation Board should be permitted to be heard in relation to the wife's section 79A application, or only in relation to any subsequent orders, and whether the Board should be joined as a party to the proceedings. The court considered that the determination of the section 79A application was an "important threshold question" that would directly affect the rights of the Board.

Strickland J reasoned that it was necessary and appropriate for the Board to be permitted to participate in the hearing of the section 79A application, as its rights would be significantly impacted by whether the original property settlement orders were set aside. The court was satisfied that the Board had an interest in and would be affected by the outcome of these proceedings.

Consequently, the court ordered that the South Australian Superannuation Board be joined as a party to the proceedings, with liberty to fully participate in all aspects. The Board was directed to file an affidavit outlining any orders it sought within 28 days, and its prior application to intervene was dismissed.