Wednesday, 05 September, 2007
In the case of Gollings and Scott (2007) FLC, the Full Court of the Family Court considered an appeal by the husband against orders for property settlement. The orders required the husband to transfer to the wife his interest in the unencumbered former matrimonial home. The husband submitted that the trial judge was in error in determining the size of the pool of assets which meant that the wife would receive more than 100% of the pool of assets in the unencumbered home.
In allowing the appeal, the Full Court adjusted the value of the asset pool, re-visited the order to give effect to the general principle that orders should not exceed the available pool and to determine whether the order was just and equitable. This decision provides an instructive example of the determination of matters which should be included in the pool of assets and outlines relevant s 75(2) factors to be considered.
This article first appeared in CCH's Australian Family Law Newsletter and the judgment is reported in Australian Family Law & Practice.