TAPPERT & TAPPERT

In the matter of Tappert & Tappert, Judge McNab considered parenting orders made by consent and the division of the parties' asset pool. The primary dispute concerned the treatment of the husband's inheritance and the addition back of legal costs incurred by both parties.

The court was required to determine how the husband's inheritance should be treated within the asset pool for the purposes of division. Additionally, the court had to decide whether to add back the legal costs incurred by both the applicant wife and the respondent husband to their respective entitlements. The ultimate question was how to achieve a just and equitable division of the parties' assets, taking into account these specific issues.

Judge McNab reasoned that the husband's inheritance should be treated as a financial resource belonging to him. The court also determined that both parties' legal costs should be added back to their entitlements, effectively meaning these costs would be borne by each party individually rather than being deducted from the divisible asset pool. Applying principles of equal contributions and the need for a just and equitable outcome, the court ordered a division of the asset pool, allocating 64% to the applicant wife and 36% to the respondent husband. The orders further detailed the specific property transfers and monetary payments required to effect this division, including the discharge of mortgages.