2 total
Section 5(6) of the Family Law Act permits awarding up to 100% of an offending spouse's net family property.
The appellant wife appealed a trial decision that limited her remedy for the respondent husband's unconscionable conduct to 100 per cent of the difference between their net family properties under s. 5(6) of the Family Law Act.
The husband had surreptitiously encumbered and sold a property, effectively gifting $190,000 to a third party to exclude it from his net family property.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that s. 5(6) empowers a court to award up to 100 per cent of the value of the offending spouse's net family property, not just the difference between the parties' properties.
The trial judgment was varied to award the appellant the full value of the respondent's net family property.
Appeal dismissed; unequal division under s. 5(6) of the Family Law Act is limited to the difference in net family properties.
The appellant wife appealed a trial judgment regarding the division of net family property.
She argued the trial judge erred by excluding a $190,000 mortgage discharge from the husband's net family property and by limiting the unequal division of property under s. 5(6) of the Family Law Act to the difference in net family properties.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's conclusion that the pleadings did not support the inclusion of the mortgage discharge, and affirming that s. 5(6) only empowers the court to order an unequal division of the difference in value of net family property, not to rearrange family assets.
