WALBECK & CAISON

In the matter of Walbeck & Caison, Judge Jarrett of the Family Court of Australia determined the division of property between the parties. The dispute concerned the assessment of contributions and the subsequent adjustment of property interests following the breakdown of the marriage.

The court was required to determine how the parties' various assets and financial resources should be divided, including interests in superannuation funds, companies, trusts, bank accounts, vehicles, and personal property. A key issue was the allocation of a significant sum held in trust accounts and the division of the respondent's interest in the B Pty Ltd Superannuation Fund, necessitating consideration of the provisions of section 90XT of the *Family Law Act 1975* and the *Family Law (Superannuation) Regulations 2001*.

Judge Jarrett applied the principles of property adjustment under the *Family Law Act 1975*, assessing the contributions of each party to the marriage and their financial resources. The court made specific orders for the retention and transfer of various assets, including furniture, vehicles, company and trust interests, and bank account balances. Crucially, the court ordered a base amount of $243,000 to be allocated to the applicant from the respondent's interest in the B Pty Ltd Superannuation Fund, with the trustee directed to calculate and pay this entitlement in accordance with the relevant legislation.

The orders provided for the applicant to retain certain personal property, her interest in Super Fund A, and her bank account balances. The respondent was to retain his personal possessions, plant and equipment, interests in various companies and trusts, his bank account balances, and his motor vehicle. A sum of $160,000 was to be paid to the applicant from funds held in trust for B Pty Ltd, with the balance to the respondent. The court also directed that the majority of funds held in trust for the B Pty Ltd Superannuation Fund be paid to C Pty Ltd. Each party was ordered to be solely responsible for liabilities in their sole name, with the respondent also assuming responsibility for liabilities of B Pty Ltd and C Pty Ltd, and both parties indemnifying each other accordingly.