Yonjan & Satyal [2023] FedCFamC2F 419

Yonjan & Satyal [2023] FedCFamC2F 419

Background Details

• Applicant: the de facto Wife
• Respondent: the de facto Husband
• Type of Relationship: De facto
• Duration: Commenced mid-2013, separated September 2019, approximately 6 years.
• Ages at Judgment: De facto Wife 35 years old, De facto Husband 34 years old.

Children

• Children from Relationship: None.
• Special Circumstances: None mentioned.

Initial Financial Positions

The reasons do not describe the parties' financial positions at the start of the relationship.

Contributions During the Relationship

• Financial Contributions:
  • The de facto Wife received regular financial support from her family, ranging from $5,000 to $10,000 monthly.
  • The de facto Husband, in a senior corporate position, made investments throughout the relationship; some were successful, while others resulted in losses.

Post-Separation Contributions and Actions

• The de facto Husband retained his employment income at approximately $250,000 per annum.
• There were no specifics about post-separation changes to asset control or parenting given that there were no children.

Current Financial Position & Property Pool

• Property Pool: Estimated between $1.1 to 1.2 million AUD.
• De facto Wife: Unemployed, financially supported by family.
• De facto Husband: Employed in a senior position, with an annual income of around $250,000.
• Assets and Liabilities:
  • Division largely involves share portfolio management, real property that was sold, cash resources, and potential undisclosed international assets.

Assessment of Contributions and Future Needs

The parties settled on the first day of the final hearing, and the court made the orders by consent. It made no findings of its own about contributions or future needs. It was told, and accepted, that:

• Contributions: a finding of roughly equal contributions was within the likely range, with each side's family money treated as that party's own contribution.
• Future Needs: the de facto Husband's income of about $250,000 a year was weighed against the de facto Wife's medical circumstances, her never having worked in paid employment in Australia, the doubt about whether she could work, and whether her family's payments would continue.
• Final Division: about 45/55 of the known assets in favour of the de facto Wife, leaving aside the disputed claim that she held assets overseas.

Unique Aspects

• The proceedings involved a litigation guardian for the de facto Wife due to medical and psychological hurdles preventing direct participation.
• Complexities included the need for expert opinions regarding financial and medical aspects, and family contributions.
• The court explained that parties usually share investment losses made in pursuit of joint objectives, unless one party acted deliberately or recklessly to reduce the assets.
• A trial would have taken four to eight more days, with further costs of $80,000 to $150,000 for each side, so the litigation had little to gain.

Main Takeaways

• Despite complexities and high litigation risks, both parties agreed to a practical settlement considering future income disparities and medical situations.
• The court approved the agreed orders as just and equitable, relying on the care taken by experienced lawyers and the litigation guardian.

This case underscores the importance of mental capacity and proper representation in family law while dealing with complex financial and personal issues in asset division.

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.