Visser & Drost (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC2F 118

Visser & Drost (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC2F 118

Relationship Details

• Type: Marriage
• Duration: Married in 2016, separated on 17 September 2019; divorce finalised in 2022. Total relationship duration was approximately 3 years.
• Ages at Judgment: Husband 50, Wife 47

Children

• Children from Previous Relationships: Wife has a daughter born in 2004 from a previous relationship.
• Other Circumstances: Husband assisted with the child's schooling and expenses during the marriage.

Initial Financial Positions

• Husband:
  • Cash settlement from previous marriage: $169,839
  • Superannuation balance at start: $306,342
  • Property: Renovated Suburb C property with $90,000 from the prior settlement.
• Wife:
  • Evidence regarding initial financial contributions was lacking, including alleged proceeds from the sale of a property in Country D.

Contributions During the Relationship

• Financial Contributions:
  • Husband was the sole income earner, responsible for all family expenses, including wife's visa costs and sending her funds.
  • Wife contributed minimally as a homemaker; no substantial financial contribution.
• Non-financial Contributions:
  • Wife's homemaker contributions were limited and impaired by time spent overseas.

Post-Separation Contributions and Actions

• Financial Contributions:
  • Husband continued to pay various household expenses despite being excluded from the Suburb C property.
  • Made interim payments totaling $10,000 towards wife's relocation expenses.
• Non-financial Contributions:
  • Wife occupied the Suburb C property without making significant contributions or payments post-separation.

Current Financial Position & Property Pool

• Property Pool:

  • Suburb C property valued at approximately $850,000. It was inherited by the husband post-separation and remained unencumbered.

• Superannuation:

  • Husband's superannuation: around $400,000. Super split ordered with $50,000 allocated to the wife from Husband's superannuation.

Assessment of Contributions and Future Needs

• Contributions:
  • Husband's contributions were assessed as overwhelmingly significant compared to Wife’s.
  • Property division: 90% to Husband, 10% to Wife.
• Future Needs Adjustments:
  • Wife granted an additional 2% adjustment in recognition of limited employment prospects and need for medical interventions.
• Final Division:
  • Wife awarded a total payment of $83,000, accounting for prior payments and cost offsets. This was deemed approximately 12% of the total property pool.

Unique Aspects

• The case highlighted the minimal homemaker contributions of the wife, a significant proportion of which were cancelled out by alleged family violence.
• Post-separation, the wife occupied the Suburb C property for about 3 years, yet no financial obligation was undertaken for outgoings.
• The inheritance of the Suburb C property by the husband after the relationship ended was a major factor influencing the court's decision.
• Court deemed it just and equitable to account for the husband's pre-marriage financial contributions towards renovations and his significant financial support.

Conclusion

The overall division accounted for the short duration of the marriage and the overwhelming financial contributions by the Husband, with a future needs assessment slightly favoring the Wife.