Worth & Worth (No.2)

Worth & Worth (No.2) involved a dispute between a husband and wife over a property settlement following their divorce. The matter was heard in the Family Court of Australia, with an appeal subsequently being lodged with the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the trial judge erred in determining the apportionment of superannuation benefits between the parties, specifically whether the husband's contribution to the wife's superannuation fund should be considered as a property settlement asset. Additionally, the court examined whether the trial judge had appropriately considered and applied relevant statutory provisions and case law in making these determinations.

In its reasoning, the court held that the trial judge did not err in his assessment of the superannuation benefits. The Full Court found that the husband's contributions to the wife's superannuation fund were indeed to be considered as part of the property pool, and the trial judge correctly applied the relevant legal principles in making this determination. The Full Court also noted that the trial judge had appropriately considered the statutory provisions and case law in reaching his decision. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the orders from the original trial remained in place.

The final orders of the court required the appellant husband to pay the costs of the respondent wife for the appeal, up to and including 18 May 2018. The costs were to be assessed on a party/party basis in the absence of an agreement between the parties, and the form of the order was subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.