SUTTON & SUTTON

In the matter of *Sutton & Sutton*, heard by Judge Morley, the wife sought an adjournment of the final hearing, which was opposed by the husband. The court was not satisfied that the wife had provided sufficient evidence of medical difficulties preventing her preparation for the hearing, nor that she had failed to receive legal assistance from Legal Aid NSW. Consequently, the application for adjournment was refused.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether to grant the wife's application for an adjournment of the final hearing, and subsequently, how to proceed given the wife's failure to attend court on the second day of the hearing. The court was also required to determine the division of the parties' property, considering the wife's failure to comply with her obligation of full and frank disclosure.

Judge Morley reasoned that the wife had not met the threshold for an adjournment, particularly in the absence of satisfactory evidence regarding her inability to prepare for the hearing or attend. As the wife failed to appear on the second day, the matter proceeded undefended. In determining the property settlement, the court found the parties' contributions to be equal, but made an adjustment in the wife's favour concerning her future earning capacity. The court made orders for the splitting of the husband's superannuation interest, the closure of a joint bank account with the balance to be paid to the wife, and for the wife to provide evidence of the discharge or refinancing of a mortgage on a property in China. The wife was also ordered to return the husband's belongings from the Chinese property. Other assets were to remain with the party in possession. The wife's application for spousal maintenance was dismissed.