Walters & Walters

[1986] FamCA 8

In the marriage of WALTERS, A.G. and WALTERS, P.A.

(1986) FLC ¶91-733

Other publishers' citations: (1986) 10 FamLR 1006

Full Court of the Family Court of Australia at Parramatta.

Judgment delivered 16 May 1986.

Before: Lindenmayer, Joske and Gun JJ.

Lindenmayer J.: This is an appeal by the wife from a judgment and orders of Yuill J., given and made at Canberra on 16 August 1985.

By para. 1, 2 and 3 of his orders of that date his Honour provided for the sale of a home unit at Southport in Queensland, of which the husband is the sole registered proprietor, and the payment to the wife of the entire net proceeds of sale of that property. His Honour made other orders to which I need not refer, except that numbered 6, which is as follows — and that relates to the wife's maintenance:

``That the respondent husband pay the applicant wife maintenance for her support in the sum of $30.00 per week for a period of nine months or until the wife leaves a treatment home known as a half-way house, whichever first occurs.''

Those orders are substantially the subject of the wife's appeal and I shall refer in due course to the wife's notice of appeal and the orders which she seeks therein.

The parties in this matter were married on 12 September 1958. They separated on 16 October 1979, and a decree nisi was pronounced dissolving the marriage on 9 October 1981. There were three children of the marriage, all of whom are now adults. The husband at the time of the hearing before his Honour was aged 50 and the wife 45.

By her original application, filed on 10 August 1981, the wife had sought an order that the husband pay her the sum of $100,000 by way of property settlement. At the commencement of the hearing before his Honour the wife altered her claim from $100,000 to $150,000 and on the next day, that is the second day of the hearing as I understand it, in the light of the evidence then before the Court as to the husband's circumstances, the wife's claim was further amended and the nature of her claim as amended was set out by his Honour in his reasons for judgment as follows:

``The husband pay to the wife on or before 16 November 1989 an amount equal to 30% of the lump sum accumulated superannuation benefits pursuant to the Commonwealth Superannuation Fund which would be payable to him if he resigned from the Commonwealth Public Service at the age of 55 years and he elected to receive the said benefits instead of a pension irrespective of whether he either so resigned or makes the said election.''

That is not the entirety of the wife's claim as amended. She sought, in addition thereto, an order that the husband pay her the sum of $25,000 immediately.

His Honour referred to this amendment and then said this:

``Sadly for the wife, her former…