Yusuf & Yusuf

In the matter of *Yusuf & Yusuf*, Foster J of the Family Court of Australia considered a property adjustment dispute between the wife (applicant) and the husband (first respondent), with a second respondent also involved. The core of the dispute revolved around the division of assets, particularly the matrimonial home, and the validity of an asserted loan arrangement between the husband and the second respondent, which the wife contended was a sham.

The legal issues before the Court included determining the true nature of the financial arrangement between the husband and the second respondent, specifically whether an asserted loan was a genuine transaction or a sham designed to defeat the wife's property claims. The Court was also required to consider the parties' respective contributions to the marriage and the relevant factors under section 75(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) in making orders for property adjustment.

Foster J found that the evidence presented by the husband and the second respondent regarding the asserted loan arrangement was not credible and concluded that the arrangement was a sham. The Court noted the husband's lack of candour and truthfulness in his evidence, highlighting his failure to provide objective corroboration for his financial assertions and his admission of never filing a tax return in Australia, despite significant financial activity. The wife's evidence was preferred where it conflicted with the husband's.

Consequently, the Court dismissed the claim relating to the asserted loan and ordered the sale of the matrimonial home located at 1 & 2 B Street, Suburb C. The net proceeds of the sale were to be distributed with 40 per cent to the wife, followed by payment of council and water rates, with the balance to the husband. The second respondent was ordered to deliver the certificate of title for the property to the applicant's solicitors.