TEMPLETON & TEMPLETON

In the matter of Templeton & Templeton, Judge Burchardt considered a property dispute between a husband and wife following a marriage of over 20 years. The sole assets available for division were the matrimonial home and the husband's superannuation. The wife sought to retain the matrimonial home, while the court had to determine whether the husband's superannuation should be split.

The court was required to determine how to achieve a just and equitable distribution of the parties' limited assets, specifically addressing the division of the matrimonial home and the husband's superannuation in the particular circumstances of the case.

Judge Burchardt reasoned that it was just and equitable for the wife to retain the matrimonial home and for the husband to retain his superannuation. The court ordered the husband to pay the wife $45,500 within 60 days. In the event of non-payment, the matrimonial home was to be sold, with proceeds applied first to sale costs, then to discharge any mortgage, and finally to satisfy the outstanding payment to the wife with interest. Pending payment or sale, the husband was granted sole occupation of the property, responsible for mortgage instalments, rates, and taxes. The parties were to hold their respective interests in the property on trust, and neither could encumber it without the other's consent. Upon payment, the wife was to transfer her interest in the property to the husband at her expense. The husband was to indemnify the wife against payments for the mortgage. Crucially, each party was to be solely entitled to their respective superannuation and other property, and each was to indemnify the other against liabilities encumbering property they received under the orders, with any joint tenancies severed. The wife's application of 2 July 2018 was otherwise dismissed.