Nilssen & Meng [2023] FedCFamC2F 282

Nilssen & Meng [2023] FedCFamC2F 282

Relationship Details

• Type: De facto relationship
• Duration: Approximately 5 years, from August 2012 to 15 October 2017
• Ages at Judgment: Applicant (male partner) 50 years, Respondent (female partner) 46 years

Children

• Two children from the relationship, X (8) and Y (6).
• The Applicant has two older children from a previous relationship.

Initial Financial Positions

• Applicant:

  • Owned property at M Street, Town J, purchased in 2007, with an approximate mortgage of $139,000 in 2012.
  • Superannuation of $22,296.

• Respondent:

  • Savings of approximately $110,000 used towards purchasing O Street property.
  • Held a purported $200,000 loan from her parents.
  • Superannuation balance of $19,378.

Contributions During the Relationship

• Financial Contributions:

  • The Respondent purchased O Street property with her savings as a deposit.
  • The Applicant claims to have contributed to property maintenance; however, the Respondent paid directly or reimbursed assistance for renovations.
  • The Respondent's earnings were significantly higher and employed throughout the period, contributing more financially overall.

• Non-Financial Contributions:

  • Care and parenting duties for children were shared. The Applicant was home and cared for children while the Respondent worked.
  • The Applicant maintained the household during times the Respondent was working night shifts and visiting China.

Post-Separation Contributions and Actions

• Financial Contributions:

  • Each party kept paying the mortgage on their own property. During the relationship the Applicant had claimed the sole parent pension and child support, which the Respondent paid by meeting grocery costs and the children's expenses.
  • Dispute over significant mortgage reduction due to the Applicant's pension claims.

• Non-Financial Contributions:

  • The children have lived in an equal time arrangement under consent parenting orders made in July 2019; the Applicant made a marginally greater parenting contribution, particularly after separation.

Current Financial Position & Property Pool

• Applicant:

  • Unemployed at the time of trial
  • Net assets valued at $244,720
  • Superannuation balance of $51,629

• Respondent:

  • Income of approximately $807 per week
  • Net assets valued at $304,000
  • Superannuation balance of $152,514

• Property Pool:

  • Total non-superannuation pool: $548,720
  • Total superannuation pool: $204,143

Assessment of Contributions and Future Needs

• Contributions:

  • Non-Superannuation: Applicant (49%), Respondent (51%) due to higher financial contributions from employment.
  • Superannuation: Applicant (37.5%), Respondent (62.5%) due to Respondent's higher accumulation during and after the relationship.

• Future Needs Considerations:

  • Respondent's obligation to repay a loan to her mother was acknowledged but not included as a liability in the balance sheet.
  • A 5% adjustment was made in the Respondent's favour because of that debt, giving a 56/44 division of the non-superannuation pool in her favour.

• Final Division:

  • Non-superannuation (56/44 in the Respondent's favour): Applicant entitled to $241,436.80 and Respondent to $307,283.20
  • Superannuation adjustment resulted in an entitlement split of $20,000 in favour of the Applicant from the Respondent's fund.

Unique Aspects or Things that Affected Decisions

• Dispute over whether the purported loan was a genuine liability affecting the Respondent's financial position.
• Applicant’s child support and Centrelink claim discrepancies impacting the perception of financial responsibilities.
• Ongoing care arrangements and the fluid living arrangements tailored towards caregiving responsibilities during the relationship.

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 90SM(3) to (5), and the court must consider the effect of family violence on each party's contributions (s 90SM(4)(ca)) and on their current and future circumstances (s 90SM(5)(a)), and any material wastage of property (s 90SM(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.