Tripp & Tripp

The Family Court of Australia considered an application by Ms Tripp (the wife) against Mr Tripp (the husband) concerning financial matters arising from their marriage. The wife sought various interim orders, including a departure from child support assessments, spousal maintenance, litigation funding, and an equal division of income from the X Property Trust. The husband sought the dismissal of the wife's application.

The court was required to determine several legal issues. These included whether to grant interim orders for spousal maintenance, including a lump sum payment, and whether to order a departure from the assessed child support rate, considering the husband's capacity to pay. The court also had to consider the wife's claim for litigation funding due to her insufficient financial resources to meet legal costs, particularly given the husband's predominant control over the parties' wealth. Furthermore, the court examined the wife's primary application for an equal division of the net income of the X Property Trust.

In its reasoning, the court applied principles relating to interim financial relief under the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) and the *Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989* (Cth). The court acknowledged the wife's onus to prove her case on the balance of probabilities but limited its determination to agreed or undisputed facts due to the nature of the hearing. The court found that the husband had the capacity to pay maintenance and child support as sought, although it deemed not all of the wife's claimed expenses for spousal maintenance to be reasonable. The court also considered the significant complexity of the financial matters and the wife's limited funds in making its orders.

The court made several interim orders. These included the husband paying $2,500 per week in spousal maintenance, all mortgage and rates on a specified property, and $750 per child per week in periodic child support, along with specific non-periodic child support for educational and health expenses. The husband was also ordered to pay $175,000 for litigation funding and $29,489 by way of urgent lump sum spousal maintenance. The wife's application and the husband's response were otherwise dismissed.