Janghu & Goyat [2023] FedCFamC2F 850

Janghu & Goyat [2023] FedCFamC2F 850

Relationship Details

• Type: Marriage
• Duration: Approximately 16 years. Married in 2002, separated in March 2018, and divorced in late 2020.
• Ages at judgment: Husband about 50 (born 1973), Wife about 51 (born 1972)

Children

• Two children from the relationship:
  • Daughter, X, born in 2005 (aged 18)
  • Son, Y, born in 2007 (aged 15)

Initial Financial Positions

• Husband:

  • Arrived in Australia in 1995, no significant assets at marriage commencement
  • Permanent resident and full-time transport worker from mid-2003
  • Received $44,153 in gifts from parents over the marriage
  • In 2007, the land for the Suburb C property was bought in his name for over $260,000, with a land loan and a deposit from his savings and family gifts; the house was built on it later

• Wife:

  • Arrived in Australia in 2003 as a qualified educator; the court found she began earning as an educator part time from 2015 and full time from 2017
  • Received assistance from husband's parents for education at L University
  • At marriage commencement, owned $2,200 and received $20,000 in wedding gifts.

Contributions During the Relationship

• Financial Contributions:

  • Husband primarily funded family expenses, mortgage payments, and property acquisitions
  • Wife contributed her whole salary to household expenses once employed, and says her mother provided $50,000 towards the Suburb C property

• Non-financial Contributions:

  • Husband contributed to home maintenance and some domestic duties
  • Wife was the primary homemaker and caregiver before 2016

Post-Separation Contributions and Actions

• Financial Contributions:

  • In June 2018 the husband drew down $150,210.56 on the home loan, obtained on the strength of a false salary, and used it for the mortgage and his own expenses
  • Wife has met the mortgage payments since January 2021

• Non-financial Contributions:

  • Wife continued as primary caregiver and homemaker for children residing with her

Current Financial Position & Property Pool

• Husband:

  • Income: transport worker earning $890 per week
  • Superannuation is negligible; he holds a 50% interest in J Pty Ltd, a company formed in January 2021

• Wife:

  • Income: approximately $89,000 per year plus superannuation
  • Superannuation estimated at $103,296

• Property Pool:

  • Major asset: Suburb C property valued at $1.35 million
  • Mortgage liability: $368,000
  • Other assets and potential financial resources include J Pty Ltd for the husband and a 1/6th interest in a property in Country D for the wife

Assessment of Contributions and Future Needs

• Contributions were equal until separation, with the wife's contributions greater afterwards, giving 52% to the wife and 48% to the husband.
• A 3% future needs adjustment was made to the wife because the younger child lives with her, less about 2% because her superannuation ($103,296) is a future financial resource. The parties were found to have a similar earning capacity.
• Superannuation was treated as a separate pool and not split.
• Final division: 53% to the wife ($520,460) and 47% to the husband ($461,540) of the net property pool of $982,000, excluding superannuation. The wife keeps the Suburb C property and pays the husband $461,540.

Unique Aspects

• Disclosure by both parties was disputed, including the husband's late disclosure and the wife's one-sixth interest in an overseas property (treated as a financial resource, not valued).
• The husband's creation of a false salary to obtain the $150,000 loan materially undermined his credibility. The drawdown was not treated as wastage or added back, but it was taken into account under s 75(2)(o).
• No costs order was made.
• Complex financial arrangements and external support from family and third parties factored into the financial analysis.

The law since this decision

This case was decided before 10 June 2025. From that date the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) sets out the steps for a property settlement in s 79(3) to (5), and the court must consider the effect of family violence on each party's contributions (s 79(4)(ca)) and on their current and future circumstances (s 79(5)(a)), and any material wastage of property (s 79(5)(d)). In Western Australia, a property case between married couples is decided under that Act in the Family Court of Western Australia. A case between de facto partners in Western Australia is decided under the Family Court Act 1997 (WA), which has not adopted those 2025 changes.