By and -

Key decisions

  • Petrellis [2023] FedCFamC1A 104
  • Abbey & Cyris [2023] FedCFamC1A 103
  • Genesalio [2023] FedCFamC1A 109
  • Spalla [2023] FedCFamC1A 87


Court failed to explain or provide procedural fairness as to two pool approach, when it divided non-superannuation pool 65:35 without any adjustment to super pool

In Petrellis [2023] FedCFamC1A 104 (30 June 2023), McClelland DCJ allowed a wife’s appeal against a decision of Judge Jenkins in respect of an 18 year marriage that produced two children.

Judge Jenkins adopted a two pool approach. The non-superannuation pool was $14,060,433 and the superannuation pool was $1,023,785. The Court assessed contributions in respect of the non-superannuation pool as 57.5 per cent in favour of the wife and made a five per cent adjustment for s 75(2).

Superannuation was not adjusted. The husband retained $653,600 and the wife received $370,185.

McClelland DCJ said (from [30]):

‘… [T]he … judge adopted … a “two pool” approach … [and] treated the parties’ superannuation interests as separate from … non-superannuation …

[38] … The difference … between … adjusting the parties’ property on the basis of a global pool, as opposed to a two pool approach, would have been … $269,681 …

[39] … [P]rocedural fairness required the … judge to notify the parties of her intended approach …

You've reached the end of this article preview

There's more to read! Subscribe to LSJ today to access the rest of our updates, articles and multimedia content.

Subscribe to LSJ

Already an LSJ subscriber or Law Society member? Sign in to read the rest of the article.

Sign in to read more