- Family Law
- Lawyers & Staff
- Cases & Articles
- Contact Us
NOTICE ALERT IN LIGHT OF COVID-19
WHAT WE PROPOSE AND HOW WE CAN ASSIST
At Watson & Watson our clients come first. Please be assured of our continued dedicated services to all current and new clients.
As we have done in the past, we will continue to offer alternative conferencing methods ie video conferencing, skype or telephone conferences. Reviewing of all documentation provided to us prior to any initial conference will be all inclusive of our set fee. Do not hesitate to contact Shereen Da Gloria on (02) 9221 6011 should you have any concerns.
The Family Court of Australia/Federal Circuit Court of Australia will divide property on a just and equitable basis and will look at the contributions of each spouse/partner and will also determine whether there is a need for adjustment in favour of one or other of the partner/spouse.
What happens if one spouse/partner has lost or wasted money?
The case of Kowaliw v Kowaliw (1981) states the general rule that financial losses incurred by the parties throughout the course of the marriage, whether jointly or otherwise should be shared by them, although not necessarily equally. The Court will sometimes “addback” property that has been lost or wasted in exceptional circumstances. There must have been a deliberate act or economic recklessness which reduced the value of the assets available for distribution. The principle set out in Kowaliw was affirmed in the case of Omancini v Omancini in 2005. The rule was brought into focus in the 2017 decision of Charles v Charles which was an appeal from the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia to the Full Family Court.
Charles v Charles
In that case the wife asserted that there should be added back to the pool an amount of money that she said the husband had lost in unprofitable share trading and a notional amount to be added back by reason of adjustments that the husband had made in the rate and timing of payments to reduce the mortgage.
The wife said but for the husband’s unprofitable share transactions and his reduction of the amount of mortgage payments, there would have been more money available for division between them.
The Judge rejected the wife’s argument that the amounts lost should be added back.
The decision of the Trial Judge was affirmed by the Full Court. The Trial Judge found that the husband’s share trading had not been designed to reduce or minimize the parties’ wealth and he had not acted recklessly, negligently or wantonly.
The test is as set out in Kowaliw v Kowaliw:
At Watson & Watson our Senior Family Law Solicitors are experienced in property/financial settlement matters. If you are in a similar position of “loss of assets through no fault of your own” and are unsure as to your rights and entitlements, please contact Richard Watson Senior Family Law Solicitor or his Personal Assistant Shereen Da Gloria to discuss your concerns and seek the appropriate advice.
This is only a preliminary view and is not to be taken as legal advice without first contacting Watson & Watson Solicitors on 9221 6011.
Personal Experienced Professional Affordable
Phone 02 9221 6011Send us your enquiry