WOOLWICH & WOOLWICH

This case concerned a property settlement dispute between a husband and wife who had cohabited for almost 17 years and raised two adult children. The primary dispute revolved around the division of their assets, including the former matrimonial home. The court was also required to consider an application by the husband for leave to re-open the case to adduce fresh evidence regarding the valuation of the former matrimonial home.

The court was tasked with determining the appropriate division of the parties' property and superannuation, taking into account their contributions during the marriage and post-separation. Specifically, the court needed to assess whether the wife's post-separation contributions, including significant mortgage repayments and maintenance costs for the former matrimonial home, outweighed the husband's contributions. Furthermore, the court had to consider the husband's failure to make full and frank disclosure and its impact on the property division, as well as the husband's future earning capacity. The court also had to decide whether to grant the husband leave to adduce fresh evidence, considering the potential prejudice to the wife and the lack of admissible evidence presented by the husband.

Johnston J found that while the parties' contributions at separation were equal, the wife's post-separation contributions, particularly in relation to the former matrimonial home and the financial burden of the children, outweighed those of the husband. Consequently, the court determined that overall contributions were 55 per cent to the wife and 45 per cent to the husband. The court also applied a 5 per cent adjustment in favour of the wife under section 75(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) due to the husband's failure to make full and frank disclosure and his higher future earning capacity. The husband's application to re-open the case was dismissed due to the lack of admissible evidence and the substantial prejudice it would cause the wife.

The court ordered that the former matrimonial home be sold by public auction, with specific terms and timelines outlined for the sale and any subsequent auction if the reserve price was not met. The proceeds of sale were to be applied to various expenses, including agent commissions, legal costs, outstanding loans, and school fees, before being distributed between the parties. Ultimately, the wife was to receive 60 per cent and the husband 40 per cent of the available property and superannuation. The court also made orders regarding the division of other assets and liabilities, the closure of joint bank accounts, and the release of exhibits.