Conciliation Conference Document (Final) - Copy PDF

Preview

Summary

Copy of the Conciliation Conference Document with arguments and supporting cases....

Description

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

CONCILIATION CONFERENCE DOCUMENT This document is prepared for the purposes of the Conciliation Conference only and is to be returned to the parties at the conclusion of the Conference or disposed of by the Registrar.

Matter name:

Hamza & Astor

Matter number:

(SYC)1234/2020

Filed on behalf of:

Bilal Hamza

Date of cohabitation:

Late 2007

Date of marriage:

10 January 2010

Date of separation:

January 2018

Length of cohabitation:

11 years

1. List of assets and liabilities with values: Ownership

Assets

Wife Wife Wife

Waterloo property Vehicle (Mercedes) Savings

Wife

Business interest

Wife Wife

Superannuation Engagement ring

Husband Husband Husband Husband Husband

Granny flat at Greenacre $ Property in Beirut $ Savings $ Superannuation $ Furnishing at Newtown $ property Total Assets:

Ownership

Liabilities

Wife Wife Husband Husband

Loan from parents Personal loan Loan from wife’s parents Credit card debt

Total Liabilities:

Husband’s Asserted Wife’s Asserted Value Value $ 1,500,000^ $ 1,400,000 $ 55,000 NIL

$

$

E 413,000*

$ $ $

E 600,000* 300,000 20,000

$

2,733,000

250,000 E 100,000* E 827,000* 60,000 40,000

2,832,000

Husband’s Value

Asserted Wife’s Asserted Value E $709,000* E $200,000*

20,000 Not Known

$ 20,000

909,000

2. Ownership

Financial Resources

NIL Total Financial Resource

Husband’s Value NIL :

Asserted

Wife’s Asserted Value NIL

0

0

TOTAL NET ASSETS AT DATE OF CONFERENCE:

$

1,804,000*

^This is based on the sale price that was posted on publicly available sources such as real estate websites. *Figures with ‘E’ at the front are estimates and all have been rounded to the nearest thousand (000’) in AUD.

2. What percentage does the party seek of the net pool?

40%

2.1. The Applicant (husband) is seeking to have 40% of the total pool of assets from this marriage.

3. Is it just and equitable to proceed with a property division under the Family Law Act, state your submissions in support this contention:

3.1. Both parties have demonstrated clear intention to end their relationship and have separated since January 2018.1

3.2. The parties no longer share common use of matrimonial home and other property arising from the marriage.2

3.3. The husband has made significant indirect and non-financial contributions to the property. 3

3.4. The non-financial contribution made by the husband has allowed the Respondent (wife) to focus on her career and increased her income capacity substantially. 4

1 Bevan & Bevan [2014] FamCAFC 19. 2 Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (‘FLA’) s 81. 3 Ibid s 79(4)(a). 4 Waters & Jurek (1995) 20 Fam LR 303.

3. 4. What percentage does the party say should be awarded to them by way of contributions? 35%

4.1. That the husband is to be awarded 35% by way of his contributions to the property of the marriage.

5. State your submissions relied on in support of the contribution percentage sought:

5.1. While it is acknowledged the wife has brought significant initial contributions to the marriage, 5 the husband has contributed to the acquisition of the matrimonial home at Waterloo by way of mortgage repayment until it was paid off in early 2017.6

5.2. The husband contributed to the conservation of the same property by paying utility bills and council rates until separation occurred in January 2018.7

5.3. The husband also contributed non-financially by way of asking his brother to assist with the renovation of the matrimonial home when it was first purchased.

5.4. Husband made contributions to the welfare of the family by sacrificing his career and selling his stake in a growing IT company to care for the children.8

5.5. The husband’s role as primary caregiver of the children has freed the wife to pursue her career and increase her earning capacity. 9

6. What percentage does the party say should be awarded to either party by way of 75(2) factors? 5%

6.1. That an adjustment of 5% should be made in favour of the husband in consideration to s 75(2) factors.

7. State your submissions relied on in support of the 75(2) percentage sought: 5 See Williams & Williams [2007] FamCA 313 at [26]. 6 Ibid. 7 FLA (n 3). 8 Ibid s 79(4)(c). See also Mahon & Mahon (1982) FLC ¶92-344 for husband’s contributions to the welfare of family. 9 Wardman & Hudson (1978) 5 Fam LR 889.

4.

7.1. Husband has suffered income disparity due to his responsibility in caring for the children prior to separation.10

7.2. Husband’s resignation from work force to care for the children contributed to the increase of earning capacity to the wife.11

7.3. The husband continues to suffer from depression and has diminished mental capacity to re-enter work force for appropriate gainful employment. 12

7.4. Husband has left his profession for an extended period of time and will require additional time and training for him to join the work force. This is particularly pertinent as his choice of profession is in the IT programming, where technological advances develop at a rapid pace.

7.5. Although he has a sizeable savings and has the capacity to support himself and the children while they are under his care, the husband currently has no income and limited capacity to earn due to his depression.13

8. What is the party's proposal/orders sought for the purposes of the Conference?

8.1. That each party shall retain all other assets and liabilities in their current possession or name.

8.2. Subject to the successful settlement for the sale of matrimonial home, that the wife shall pay a sum to the husband that represents an adjusted amount of 40% from the total pool of assets. 14

WORD COUNT: 470

10 Waters & Jurek (n 4). 11 Ibid. 12 FLA, s 75(2)(b). 13 Ibid s 75(2)(d). 14 Pierce v Pierce [1998] FamCA 74...