Yang and Lawson

In *Yang & Lawson* [2012] FamCA 1025, the Family Court of Australia considered a property settlement dispute between Ms Yang (the applicant wife) and Mr Lawson (the respondent husband). The parties, married for approximately five years, separated in October 2010 and were unable to reach an agreement regarding the division of their assets and liabilities. There were no children of the marriage.

The court was required to determine the just and equitable distribution of the parties' property and liabilities. This involved assessing their respective contributions, both financial and non-financial, throughout the marriage, and considering whether any adjustments were warranted under section 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) to account for factors such as the length of the marriage and the age and health of the parties. The court also had to consider the specific assets and liabilities in dispute, including real estate in South Korea and the United States, shareholdings in various companies, and liabilities associated with those companies.

The court's reasoning focused on the contributions made by each party. While the husband was found to have made the greater financial contribution, the wife's contributions were also acknowledged as valuable. The court applied principles of property adjustment under the *Family Law Act*, aiming for a division that was both just and equitable. The court considered the specific circumstances of the parties, including their ages and the fact that there were no children, in making its determination.

The court made orders for the transfer of property and shareholdings between the parties, the refinancing of a mortgage, and the indemnification of liabilities. Specifically, the wife was to transfer her interest in the US property to the husband, who was to assume responsibility for the mortgage and associated outgoings. The wife was also to transfer her shareholding in F Pty Ltd to the husband, with the husband indemnifying her against any liabilities related to that company. The wife was declared the sole owner of the South Korean property and other assets in her possession, while the husband was declared the sole owner of other property in his possession, with specific provisions for the company F Pty Ltd to forgive any claims against the wife and G Pty Ltd. The husband was also ordered to transfer ownership of a boat to the wife.