A 28-year marriage, a home refinanced again and again, and 60/40

The couple married in December 1986 after a short time living together, and separated in November 2014. They had three children, now adults. The youngest has a disability and lives with the mother in the home they jointly own. Both worked hard throughout, often six or seven days a week, and by 2011 they earned similar incomes. At trial he was 62 and earned about $97,000 a year; she was 61 and earned about $121,000.

Over the years they refinanced the home to put money into his business ventures and to pay for holidays, cars for the children and credit card debt, until in 2011 about $650,000 was secured against it. The wife blamed the husband for the borrowing. Justice O'Brien did not accept that: she had taken part in the decisions. In 2013, late in the marriage, she received $330,000 from her mother's estate, but most of it had been spent, including on a car, a family trip to Europe and debts.

The pool was agreed at $1,042,558, most of it super. The home was worth $850,000 with $575,886 owing against it. The husband offered the wife 52.5%. The judge said equal contributions would readily be found in a long marriage like this, but for two things: the inheritance, and the wife's continuing care of their son, because contributions to the family do not stop when children turn 18. He assessed contributions at 55/45 to her.

Looking ahead, the wife would support their son without help from the husband, although the judge noted that was partly her choice. Her request for maintenance for the son was dismissed for lack of evidence. A further 5% to her made the result 60% to the wife and 40% to the husband. Each kept their own super, accounts and cars. She had 60 days to refinance and pay him $118,449 to keep the home; otherwise it would be sold.