WOODBRIDGE & WOODBRIDGE

In the matter of *Woodbridge & Woodbridge*, Judge Neville of the Family Court of Australia considered a property adjustment dispute between a husband and wife following a marriage of modest length. The wife also sought spousal maintenance.

The court was required to determine how to adjust the parties' property interests, taking into account their respective contributions, including the husband's argument concerning the wife's care of a child from a previous relationship. Additionally, the court had to assess whether the wife had established the necessary 'need' for spousal maintenance, and to resolve conflicts between the evidence of one party and their expert witness, particularly concerning the wife's health issues and the advisability of her use of expensive medication.

The court's reasoning led to a consent order regarding the restraint of funds from a joint bank loan account, with liberty for the husband to pay expenses for specified properties and a company. The properties were ordered to be sold, with a portion of the proceeds to be placed in an interest-bearing deposit for their son's school fees. The net proceeds of sale were to be distributed after the discharge of various loans and chattel mortgages, with 68% allocated to the husband and the balance to the wife. The husband was also ordered to transfer a motor vehicle to the wife. The wife's application for spousal maintenance was dismissed, and each party was to retain their own property and be solely liable for their respective debts, with each party to bear their own costs unless an application was filed within seven days.