WAT & LEW

In the Family Court of Australia, Mead J considered applications by the Husband for interim spousal maintenance and litigation funding in property proceedings between the parties. The marriage had lasted seven years, and a key dispute concerned the Husband's capacity to engage in fulltime employment.

The court was required to determine whether the Husband should receive interim spousal maintenance, considering the relevant factors under section 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Additionally, the court had to decide whether to grant litigation funding to the Husband, particularly in light of the Wife's control over the parties' finances and the parties' mutual failure to transparently disclose their financial circumstances.

Regarding spousal maintenance, the court dismissed the Husband's application, implying that the s 75(2) factors did not support an award in his favour. However, concerning litigation funding, the court found that the Wife's failure to disclose was of greater consequence and that the Husband lacked existing resources to fund his legal fees, placing him at a significant disadvantage. Consequently, the court ordered the Wife to withdraw $50,000 from her bank account and pay it into the Husband's solicitors' trust account on account of his legal fees. This payment was characterised as an interim settlement of property, with its final nature to be determined at trial. The Husband's other interim applications were dismissed, and costs were reserved.