Metwally v University of Wollongong

(a) transfer to the Applicant wife, all of his right, title and ownership in and to the cabins located at sites 1 and 2 V Street at the holiday business ("the cabins");

(b) the husband shall deliver up to the wife any documents in his power, possession or control pertaining to the holiday properties;

(c) assign any entitlement to any rental receipts for the holiday properties received by the wife up to and from the date of these Orders; and

(d) in the event the husband has registered any security or charge in relation to the holiday properties, he shall cause same to be released at his sole cost.

1. That the parties shall, within twenty eight (28) days of the date of this Order, do all acts and things and sign all documents necessary to cause the Westpac Bank account No...77 to be closed and shall cause any closing proceeds to be paid to the wife.
2. That pursuant to s 38(f) of the Partnership Act 1891 (Qld) the "[BA]" partnership ("the Partnership") is dissolved as at the date of this Order.
3. That the parties shall do all acts and things and sign all documents necessary to give effect to the dissolution of the Partnership pursuant to Order 4 hereof, including:

(a) to instruct their respective accountants to prepare and lodge all outstanding taxation and financial documents for the Partnership in a timely manner; and

(b) to disclose copies of all tax returns lodged for the Partnership to date within seven (7) days of the date of this Order;

1. That by 30 November 2025, the husband and the wife, including in their personal capacities and as directors of AS Pty Ltd ("the Trustee") as trustee for the AS Holdings Trust (hereafter "the SMSF Fund"), shall each respectively do all acts and things and sign all necessary documents necessary to:

(a) instruct the accountant for the SMSF Fund ("the SMSF Accountant") to prepare an updated balance sheet for the SMSF Fund and to calculate the current member balances for each of the husband and the wife;

(b) comply with any directions of the SMSF Accountant to cause the implementation of this paragraph in relation to the SMSF Fund;

(c) instruct the SMSF Accountant to prepare the tax returns and financial statements for any outstanding financial years;

(d) instruct an auditor for the SMSF Fund to prepare the audit reports for any outstanding financial years;

(e) sign and instruct the SMSF Accountant to lodge (as applicable) the tax returns and financial statements for the SMSF for any outstanding financial years;

(f) cause the wife's membership entitlement in the SMSF Fund to be rolled out of the SMSF Fund and into another complying superannuation fund nominated by her; and

(g) to cause the SMSF Fund to meet the costs associated with the carrying out the steps set out in this Order.

1. That within twenty eight (28) days of the wife's interest being rolled out of the SMSF Fund, the wife shall do all acts and things and sign all documents necessary to resign as a director of AS Pty Ltd, transfer her shareholding in that company to the husband and resign as a member of the SMSF Fund, with the husband to cause the necessary documents to be prepared and provided to the wife prior to the deadline referred to in this Order.
2. That pending the rolling out of the wife's superannuation entitlements pursuant to these Orders, each party is restrained, except with the prior written consent of the other:

(a) From dealing with, charging, encumbering or disposing of any of the assets of the SMSF Fund other than in accordance with these Orders; and

(b) Doing any such act or thing which would defeat, extinguish or reduce the entitlement of either party in the SMSF Fund pursuant to these Orders.

1. That save for any other provision provided for in the Orders herein, after giving effect to Order 6 hereof, the husband shall be liable for and indemnify the wife absolutely in relation to AS Pty Ltd and the SMSF Fund, for all liabilities, whether past present or future including but not limited to taxation liabilities or penalties.

1. That pending the transfer (or default sale) of each of the real properties situated at L Street, Suburb M in the State of Queensland ("the L Street property") and K Street, Suburb E in the State of Queensland ("the K Street property") (as the case may be), neither party shall encumber or further encumber either of those real properties by conducting any drawings on any mortgage or line of credit accounts, unless done so with the prior written consent of the other party.

1. That by 31 December 2025, the husband shall provide vacant possession of the L Street property to the wife (and the wife is at liberty to dispose of any personal property remaining at the L Street property on or after that date), including but not limited to doing the following:

(a) Remove all of his personal property including any property owned in connection with his business (but excluding fixtures) located at the L Street property;

(b) Arrange, at his cost, for the L Street property to be professionally cleaned and free of any damage; and

(c) Deliver to the wife all keys, codes and controls for the L Street property and its fixtures.

1. That within twenty eight (28) days of the date of this Order and contemporaneously with the performance of Order 17 hereof and the wife receiving the payment referred to at Order 21(b) below, the husband shall do all acts and things necessary to transfer all of his right, title and interest in the property situate at L Street, Suburb M in the State of Queensland, more properly described as Lot [...] on Survey Plan [...], Title Reference [...] ("the L Street property") to the wife.
2. That in exchange for and contemporaneously with the transfer of the husband's interest in the L Street property pursuant Order 12 hereof, the wife shall refinance and/or discharge both the Commonwealth Bank of Australia home loan numbered [...] and the Commonwealth Bank of Australia Viridian Line of Credit number [...] secured by registered mortgage against the title to the L Street property and thereby obtain the husband's absolute release from same.
3. That the husband shall bear responsibility for outgoings attributable to the ownership and occupation of the L Street property up to and including the date on which the husband has vacated the L Street property.
4. That the wife shall bear responsibility for outgoings attributable to the ownership and occupation of the L Street property as and from the date on which the husband has vacated the L Street property.
5. That the husband shall provide to the wife within twenty eight (28) days of these Orders a copy of any document that is in his possession or control relating to the purchase of the L Street property or the body corporate associated with the property (including body corporate seal).

1. That within twenty eight (28) days of the date of this Order and contemporaneously with performance of Order 12 hereof, the wife shall do all acts and things as are necessary, including by signing any documents required to transfer to the husband, all of her right, title and ownership in and to the property known as K Street, Suburb E in the State of Queensland more properly described as Lot [...] on Registered Plan [...], Title Reference [...] ("the K Street property").
2. That contemporaneously with the transfer of the K Street property ("the K Street refinance deadline"), the husband shall refinance the Commonwealth Bank home loan number [...] secured by registered mortgage against the title to the K Street property, including any arrears owing in respect of the loan as at the date of these Orders, and thereby obtain the absolute release of the wife from same.
3. That the husband shall indemnify the wife to, for and in respect of all encumbrances, taxes, bills and outgoings attributable to the K Street property and occupation thereof, including the discharge of any arrears of same.
4. That in the event that the husband fails to refinance the loan referred to at Order 18 hereof by the K Street refinance deadline, the K Street property shall be sold in accordance with the sale regime at Order 27 hereof unless otherwise agreed between the parties in writing.

Distribution of funds held in Trust on behalf of AD Trust

1. That the current nett proceeds of $781,653 held in Trust shall be distributed as follows:

(a) $58,797 to the husband for repairs to the investment properties (after allowances for proceeds of insurance claims);

(b) $594,006 to the wife; and

(c) The balance of $128,850 is the entitlement of the husband who may disburse the funds as he wishes, subject to him being responsible to ensure that the AD Trust indemnifies the wife from the capital gains tax liability.

1. That the husband shall draw on his loan account established in the AD Trust to the full extent possible and use the funds to part pay the wife her entitlement under Order 21(b) hereof.
2. That this Order operates as an authority of each party (including in any capacity of each party as Director or Trustee) to and/or the accountant for each party (and each entity in which that party has an interest) to:

(a) communicate with and share documents and information the other party's accountant for the purposes of implementing and verifying compliance with these Orders;

(b) provide to the requesting party such information and copies of documents as they may reasonably seek in relation to the requesting party's taxation records; and

(c) provide to the requesting party any documents or information requested by the requesting party's accountant to:

(i) prepare, lodge, amend or verify the accuracy of any of the requesting party's taxation returns in respect of the financial years spanning the financial year ending 2004 to the financial year ending 2025, at the requesting party's cost;

(ii) implement the terms of these Orders (including but not limited to the giving of the advice, conferencing and preparation of documents); and

(iii) confirm the lodgement of documents with the Australian Taxation Office ("ATO") by either party or to confirm receipt of any Notices of Assessment or other documents arising from the lodgement of such documents.

1. That by 31 January 2026, the husband and wife shall each (and cause their respective accountants) do all acts and things and sign all documents necessary to:

(a) prepare, execute and lodge with the ATO (as applicable) the taxation return and financial statement for AD Pty Ltd and the AD Trust for the financial year ending 2025;

(b) provide executed copies of the lodged documents referred to above to the other party; and

(c) instruct their respective accountants to confer and attempt to reach agreement on the most tax effective manner for the distribution of the nett Suburb G sale proceeds pursuant to these Order 21 to occur.

1. That subject to the terms of this Order, the wife shall retain as her sole and exclusive property:

(a) the holiday properties;

(b) the L Street property;

(c) the jet ski, jewellery, furniture and household contents in her possession;

(d) her interim property distribution;

(e) her superannuation entitlements;

(f) the distribution from the proceeds of sale of the AD Trust properties; and

(g) all other personal property and bank accounts in her possession or control at the date of this Order.

1. That subject to the terms of this Order, the husband shall retain as his sole and exclusive property:

(a) the K Street property;

(b) Motor Vehicle 1; Motor Vehicle 2; Motor Vehicle 3 and trailer; jewellery, furniture, share portfolio and household contents in his possession;

(c) his interim property distributions;

(d) his superannuation entitlements;

(e) the distribution from the proceeds of sale of the AD Trust properties;

(f) all other personal property and bank accounts in his possession or control at the date of the Order, including:

(i) his shareholding in AT Pty Ltd and the intellectual property therefore;

(ii) his shareholding in AU Pty Ltd;

(iii) his shareholding in AV Pty Ltd;

(iv) his shareholding in AS Pty Ltd;

(v) his superannuation and any employment entitlements;

(vi) his shareholding in AW Pty Ltd;

(vii) his shareholding in AD Pty Ltd; and

(viii) his interest in the AD Trust.

1. That in the event that by operation of these Orders the wife is required to sell the L Street property or the husband is required to sell the K Street property, the sale regime shall be as follows:

(a) The property shall be listed for sale by public auction within twenty eight (28) days of the property being required to be sold in accordance with the sale regime pursuant to these Orders;

The listing agent shall be nominated by the husband, with the husband to advise the wife in writing of his nominated listing agent within seven (7) days of the K Street refinance deadline, failing which the wife shall forthwith nominate the listing agent;

(b) The conveyancing solicitor shall be nominated by the wife providing the husband with a panel of three (3) conveyancing solicitors within fourteen (14) days of the property being listed for sale and the husband making his nomination within seven (7) days of receiving the panel, failing which the wife shall select a solicitor from the panel;

(c) The reserve price of the property shall be such amount as is agreed between the parties and failing agreement as recommended by the agent nominated to sell the property ("the agent");

(d) The parties are to comply with the real estate agent's reasonable requests in relation to the marketing of the property for sale and allowing inspection of the property at all times reasonably requested by the agent;

(e) That for the purposes of sale of each of the properties, the parties shall execute the contract of sale and all other documents necessary to complete the sale of the property including all transfer documentation forthwith upon its submission to them by the agent or the conveyancing solicitor;

(f) When a property proceeds to auction and the bidding at the auction does not reach the reserve price, the parties shall negotiate with the highest bidders or any other interested persons and effect the sale of the property for a price that is at least 95% of the reserve price; and

(g) If a property remains unsold at auction, the parties shall do all acts and things and sign all documents necessary to re-list the property for additional auctions, with each being within sixty (60) days of the previous auction (on such date as the listing agent recommends) and with a reserve price of 95% of the previous auction's reserve price until the property sells.

1. That the proceeds of sale of any property sold pursuant to the immediately preceding Order shall be paid in the following manner and priority:

(a) Payment of the agent's commission and expenses;

(b) Payment of the conveyancing solicitors' costs and outlays;

(c) To pay down and discharge any loan/s and any line/s of credit secured against the property's title; and

(d) The balance of sale proceeds for the property shall be paid to the husband.

1. That within twenty-eight (28) days of the date of these Orders, the husband and wife do all acts and things as are necessary, including by signing any documents required to give effect to the following:

(a) Closure of the joint bank account numbers ...28, ...79, ...59, ...69 ...24, ...84 and ...00; and

(b) Payment of all joint bank balances, being those back account numbers ...28, ...79, ...59, ...69 ...24, ...84 and ...00 to the husband.

1. That the wife shall, within twenty eight (28) days after the distribution of the balance of sale proceeds pursuant to Order 21 above, do all acts and things and sign all such documents as may be necessary to:

(a) transfer and/or assign to the husband or his nominee, any entitlement as a beneficiary or otherwise from or arising from the AD Trust whether in law or in equity;

(b) otherwise forego and hold harmless, any claim, entitlement, suit, demand or other chose in action (whether in law or in equity) she has to, for, against or in respect of the AD Trust; and

(c) both unconditionally and permanently exclude herself from all classes of beneficiary of the AD Trust, so as to effect a relinquishment of all of her right, title, interest, powers and privileges if any to and in such trust and so purposes of same, the wife shall acknowledge that the provisions made for her by this Order are in place of her entitlements in such trust.

1. That the husband shall, subject to these Orders:

(a) indemnify and hold harmless the wife against and forego, any claim, entitlement, suit, demand or other chose in action (whether existing or arising in the future, and in law or equity) which the AD Trust or AD Pty Ltd, has to, for or against the wife now or in the future;

(b) indemnify the wife for and in respect of any taxation or other revenue obligations, or any other liability, howsoever arising in relation to the AD Trust or AD Pty Ltd; and

(c) in the event that the wife has given any guarantees in respect of any debts owed by AD Pty Ltd or the AD Trust, within twenty eight (28) days of the date of these Orders do all acts and things and make any payments (including the sale of the K Street property to pay down any debts) necessary to cause the release the wife absolutely as guarantor.

1. That subject to these Orders, the husband shall indemnify the wife and keep her indemnified from and in relation to:

(a) any liability owed by him or any company or trust in which he has an interest;

(b) any liability of any kind owed or claimed to be owed to any member of his family;

(c) any liability, howsoever arising in relation to his business or work or conduct as a professional;

(d) his credit cards and personal loans;

(e) any liability, howsoever arising in relation to the companies referred to in Order 26(f) hereof, including as to arrears; and

(f) any other liability howsoever arising in his name including as to arrears.

1. That subject to these Orders, the wife shall indemnify the husband and keep him indemnified from and in relation to:

(a) any liability of any kind owed or claimed to be owed to any member of her family;

(b) any liability arising out of the ownership of the holiday properties;

(c) her credit cards and personal loans; and

(d) any other liability howsoever arising in her name including as to arrears.

1. That each party shall do all acts and things reasonably required by the other including the signing or execution of all necessary documents to give effect to the provisions of this Order within fourteen (14) days of being requested to do so.
2. That in the event that a party refuses or neglects to sign or execute and return a document within fourteen (14) days of presentation to them or a solicitor representing them, then pursuant to s 106A of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), a Registrar of this Court (or any other Court of competent jurisdiction) is appointed and empowered and directed hereby to sign or execute the same in the name of that party upon presentation of such document and an affidavit of a solicitor on behalf of the requesting party as to the said neglect or refusal.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court's records.

Note: This copy of the Court's Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Humphrey & Humphrey has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

1. On 28 March 2025, the Court published Reasons in this property matter (Humphrey & Humphrey (No 6) [2025] FedCFamC1F 106) and after setting some parameters for what orders would likely achieve justice and equity (at paragraphs 81 to 90), further submissions were invited - not the least because of the uncertainty of the calculation of Capital Gains Tax ("CGT") (being estimated at the trial at $117,731 - see paragraph 84 of the Reasons); what were the nett proceeds of sale of the Suburb G properties; clarification as to how funds can be distributed to the wife (if that is what is necessary); and machinery provisions for enforcement including the timetable for the husband to vacate the L Street property.
2. Following publication of those Reasons, further submissions have been received and relevant orders pronounced:

(a) On 3 April 2025, directions were made for the filing of submissions, with the husband (by Order made 10 April 2025) receiving an extension to file his submissions;

(b) The wife filed an affidavit on 7 April 2025, deposing, inter alia, to:

(i) nett funds held of $781,653.39 in the trust account of the husband's then lawyers as per an attached Trust Account Statement;

(ii) her continued uncertainty as to whether income tax returns for the "[holiday properties] partnership" had been lodged; and

(iii) the wife's desire to live in the L Street property as her residence.

(c) As directed, the wife filed written submissions on 7 April 2025, together with a detailed minute of order, comprising 50 paragraphs;

(d) On 30 April 2025, the husband (as an unrepresented litigant) filed further submissions - which although said to be in response to the submissions of the wife, seemed more to be submissions seeking to adduce further evidence by way of re-opening;

(e) On 29 April 2025, the husband filed an affidavit sworn 29 April 2025, which is exactly the same as the husband's affidavit refiled on 15 August 2025. This affidavit contained 200 paragraphs and sought to further rely upon:

(i) the husband's affidavits filed 27 May 2022 and 28 July 2025; and

(ii) further annexures being, inter alia, invoices and alleged statements of loans from his parents;

(iii) claims for "unpaid labour and travel expenses for repairing and preparing the Suburb G properties for sale between July 2022 and December 2023" (see annexure "[MRH]-20"); and

(iv) confirmed, at paragraph 163, that taxation returns and financials for the 2023 and 2024 financial years for the AD Trust "are currently being prepared". Although the husband deposed to his then unfiled application to re-open being supported by an affidavit by his accountant Mr AX, such affidavit was not filed until 19 August 2025.

(f) On 20 May 2025, the wife filed further brief submissions in reply, which, inter alia, objected to any new evidence from the husband, absent an application to re-open being successful;

(g) The finalised reasons for judgment became reserved thereafter on 20 May 2025. On 31 July 2025, the Court gave notice to the parties (both parties now being unrepresented) that the Court would deliver final Reasons on 21 August 2025;

(h) On 15 August 2025, the husband formally (and finally) filed an Application in a Proceeding to re-open, seeking the following orders:

Urgency

1. That this be considered Urgently due to the proposed delivery of Judgment in the Property Proceedings in this matter on 21 August 2025 by The Honourable Justice Baumann.

2. That all timeframes for compliance with obligations under the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) for service, the filing of material or taking of any other steps concerning this application be abridged.

Stay of the Court's Intention to Deliver Judgment in Proceedings BRC 4211/2019

1. That the proposed delivery of Judgment in the Property Proceedings BRC 4211/2019 by The Honourable Justice Baumann in this matter be stayed pending the hearing and consideration of the Applicant Husband's Application for Leave to Re-Open the Property Proceedings in this matter to introduce into evidence the matters set out below which have only recently been identified and the Application by the Applicant Husband for the Respondent Wife to provide Full Financial Disclosure as set out below.

2. That all Final Orders in relation to Property Proceedings BRC 4211/2019 be stayed until further Order

Leave to Re-Open

1. That the Applicant Husband have leave to re-open the Property Proceedings and adduce into evidence, Accounting, Financial and Affidavit evidence in relation to the following Financial issues;

   a) Fraud and Misrepresentation by the Respondent Wife, and her failure to provide full Financial Disclosure in accordance with the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) and the Family Law Act 1975 during the conduct of the Property Proceedings in this matter to the current time;

   b) Breaches by the Respondent Wife of the Partnership Act 1891;

   c) Breaches by the Respondent Wife of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997;

   d) Accounting, Taxation and Financial evidence from the Applicant Husband and the Applicant Husband's Accountant [Mr AX] of [AJ Pty Ltd] relevant to the issues in paragraphs 5 a), 5 b) and Sc) above;

   e) Accounting, Taxation, Balance Sheet and Financial evidence from the Applicant Husband and the Applicant Husband's Accountant [Mr AX] of [AJ Pty Ltd] relevant to the following Financial issues that was not available at the last hearing date, or before the date evidence was closed and which has only recently become available;

   1. The substantial Financial Contributions made by the Husband to the Preservation and payment of Expenses with respect to the real Properties Jointly owned by the parties -- and the real Properties owned by the [AD Trust] during the conduct Property Proceedings in this matter to the current time;
   2. The substantial Loans that the Husband has incurred in order to make substantial Financial Contributions with respect to the Preservation of the real Properties jointly owned by the parties, the real Properties owned by the [AD Trust], the manufactured homes owned by the [BA] Partnership and for the Preservation and payment of expenses with respect to the Applicant Husband's [business] during the Property Proceedings in this matter to the current time;
   3. The necessity of the Applicant Husband to Loan monies to the [AD Trust] in order to continue to Preserve, Repair and facilitate the Sale of the three (3) real properties owned by the [AD Trust] and the Jointly owned real property located at [Q Street Suburb R] during the Property Proceedings in this matter to the current time;
   4. Financial Evidence in relation to the substantial Financial Contributions made by the Applicant Husband towards the payment of past and future children's expenses relevant to these proceedings;

Orders for Financial Disclosure

1. That the Respondent Wife, [Ms Humphrey] within 14 days provide full Financial Disclosure to the Applicant Husband and the Applicant Husband's Accountant, [Mr AX] of [AJ Pty Ltd], with copies of the following Financial Documentation;

   a) All Rental and GST Invoices in relation to the manufactured homes [1 and 2 V Street] owned by the [BA] Partnership ABN [...] ("The Partnership") that the Respondent Wife has issued to [AR Company], whether issued under the Partnership ABN or under another ABN between the dates of November 2017 to the current time inclusive;

   b) All receipts, documents and bank statements evidencing any [BA] Partnership expenses that have been incurred by the Partnership or that the Respondent Wife has incurred on behalf of the Partnership, or paid in respect of the manufactured homes [1 and 2 V Street] between the dates of November 2017 to the current time inclusive;

   c) All Business Activity Statements that have been prepared by the Respondent Wife and/or lodged with the Australian Taxation Office on behalf of the Partnership or on behalf of the Respondent Wife, for any income or GST received by the Respondent Wife with respect to the manufactured homes [1 and 2 V Street] owned by the Partnership between the dates of November 2017 to the current time inclusive;

   d) All the Respondent Wife's Bank Statements which evidence the payment of any Partnership or other Income or GST payments received by the Respondent Wife from [AR Company] with respect to the manufactured homes [1 and 2 V Street] owned by The Partnership between the dates of November 2017 to the current time inclusive;

   e) All documentation that evidences any payments of GST paid by [Ms Humphrey] to the Australian Taxation Office in respect of any income received by [Ms Humphrey from [AR Company] with respect to the manufactured homes [1 and 2 V Street] owned by The Partnership between the dates of November 2017 to the current time inclusive.

   1. That the Applicant Husband have leave to put into evidence the following Affidavits in support of this Application as follows;

a) Affidavit of [Mr Humphrey]

b) Affidavit of [Mr AX] of [AJ Pty Ltd]

c) Affidavit of [Mr AY] of [AG Real Estate]

d) Affidavit of [Ms AP]

e) Affidavit of [Mr AQ]

f) Updating Affidavit of [Mr Humphrey]

The Costs of Preparation and Lodgement of Amended and Updated Partnership Tax Returns, Business Activity Statements and Financial Reports

1. That upon receipt of the Further Full Financial Disclosure from the Respondent Wife as outlined above, that the Applicant Husband instruct [AJ Pty Ltd] to prepare as necessary all amended and/or updated Partnership Taxation Returns, Business Activity Statements and Financial Reports for the [BA] Partnership for the 2018 to 2025 Financial Years inclusive, and that the costs of the Partnership Taxation Returns, Business Activity Statements and Financial Reports prepared by [AJ Pty Ltd] be paid equally by the Applicant Husband and the Respondent Wife by each depositing into the Westpac Partnership Bank Account BSB [...] AC ...77 sufficient funds to equally pay for the costs incurred by [AJ Pty Ltd] in amending and finalising the Partnership Tax Returns, Business Activity Statements and Financial Reports.

Indemnity

1. That the Respondent Wife indemnify the [BA] Partnership and the Applicant Husband for;

   a) Any civil or criminal liabilities or penalties as a result of the actions of the Respondent Wife in breaching the provisions of the Partnership Act 1891, the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 or any other relevant legislation;

   b) Any misappropriation of Partnership funds, income tax or GST payments by the Respondent Wife that should have been paid to the Australian Taxation Office at the relevant times and any penalties arising therefrom;

   c) Payment of any outstanding debts or penalties owing to the Australian Taxation Office by the parties of the [BA] Partnership as a result of the actions of the Respondent Wife in misappropriating and/or not disclosing or remitting to the Australian Taxation Office her receipt of any Partnership Income or GST.

The [AS Holdings Trust] Self Managed Superannuation Fund

1. That the Respondent Wife cooperate in all respects with [AJ Pty Ltd] by signing and authorising the Tax Returns and Financial Documentation prepared by [AJ Pty Ltd] with respect to the [AS Pty Ltd] ATF [AS Holdings Trust], Self Managed Superannuation Fund, to facilitate the finalisation and lodgement of all Tax Returns and Financial Documentation with respect to this entity.

Orders for Investment of Monies Held in the Controlled Trust Account of [AZ Pty Ltd]

1. That within 14 days the net sale proceeds from the sale of the [AD Trust] properties currently held in the controlled monies Trust Account of the Applicant Husband's former solicitors, [AZ Pty Ltd] Family Lawyers be invested in a controlled interest bearing account until the finalisation of the Property Proceedings in this matter.

Case Management Hearing

1. That this matter be listed for a Case Management Hearing for the making of further directions, including with respect to the filing of material and the further hearing of the Application by the Applicant Husband to Re-Open the Property Proceedings in this matter at the earliest possible date prior to 21 August 2025 if possible.

(As per the original)

(i) In support of his Application to re-open, the husband seeks to rely upon:

(i) his affidavit (originally filed on 29 April 2025 but "re-filed" on 15 August 2025, as earlier noted);

(ii) the affidavit of Mr AX, the husband's accountant (comprising 414 pages) filed 19 August 2025; and

(iii) the affidavit of the husband's mother filed 18 August 2025.

(j) On 18 August 2025, the Court ordered that the wife file and serve a Response to the husband's Application to re-open (supported by affidavit) by 25 August 2025. The wife did so, and her Response sought the following orders:

1. That the Application in a Case filed by the Respondent Father on 18 August 2025 be dismissed.

2. That the Affidavit filed by the Respondent Father on 29 April 2025 be dismissed.

3. That the Affidavit filed by the Respondent Father on 18 August 2025 be dismissed.

4. That the Written Submissions filed by the Respondent Father on 30 April 2025 be dismissed.

5. That the Affidavit filed by [Ms AP] on 18 August 2025 be dismissed.

6. That the Affidavit filed by [Mr AX] on 19 August 2025 be dismissed.

7. That the Affidavit filed by [Mr AQ] on 25 August 2025 be dismissed.

8. That the "Reply Submissions on behalf of the Applicant Wife" filed 7 April 2025, together with the Wife's proposed Minute of Final Property Adjustment Orders, be adopted by the Court.

9. That the total expenses for all of the properties to be reimbursed to the Respondent Father be capped at $30,000 in total, consistent with his proposal of $7,500 per property.

10. That the Respondent Father cannot file any further affidavit material in relation to these financial l proceedings and cannot cause a third party to do so.

11. That the Respondent Father, [Mr Humphrey] be declared by the Court a vexatious litigant in light of his repeated and abusive use of the Court process to delay finalisation of proceedings.

12. That the Court forthwith determine the Wife's outstanding costs applications in relation to:

    (a) the adjournment of the financial trial in from January to June 2020; and

    (b) the adjournment of the re-opened trial from August to November 2023·and that:

    (i) such costs be assessed and paid on an indemnity basis out as set out in the costs orders associated with these adjournments, and paid to the mother;

    (ii) no further mention or hearing be required for assessment;

    (iii) such costs be paid directly from the Husband's entitlement to funds held in the [AZ Pty Ltd] Family Lawyers' trust account before any further distribution of trust monies to him, within 28 days of the final orders;

    (iv) and any costs order sought or made by the Respondent Father against the Applicant Wife be dismissed.

Amended Orders Relating to Financial Minute of Orders of the Respondent mother

1. That the Husband do all thing necessary to give effect to the superannuation split and rollover of the Wife's entitlements in the [AS Pty Ltd] Superannuation Fund within 28 days of the date of these Orders including providing all documents required by the Wife's nominated fund and the Fund's trustee.
2. That each of the Husband and the Wife and each entity under their control (including [AD Pty Ltd] and the [BA] Partnership), prepare and lodge all outstanding tax returns and financial statements up to and including the financial year ending 2025 within 60 days of the date of these Orders and provide copies to the other party within 7 days of lodgement.
3. That the Husband provide vacant possession of the property situated at [L Street, Suburb M], within 28 days of the date of these Orders.
4. That in the event the Husband fails to vacate the [L Street] property within 28 days, the Marshal of the Court is authorised to take possession and deliver vacant possession to the Wife.
5. That the parties' accountants correspond directly by email copying both parties, and exchange all tax returns financial statements and notices of assessment, in order to finalise the taxation and financial matters without either party acting as an intermediary.
6. The following additional order is added: That the Respondent Father be reimbursed the total sum of $30,000 in relation to the houses, such reimbursement to be made only after the Applicant Mother has received all payments to her under these Orders and at the conclusion of the settlement distribution process.

(k) The husband, outside of any time limits directed by the Court, filed further affidavits he seeks to rely upon, being:

(i) an affidavit by his father, Mr AQ, on 25 August 2025; and

(ii) an affidavit by Mr AY, a Suburb G real estate agent.

(l) The wife filed four affidavits in support of her Response to the husband's Application to re-open, explained in part by the fact that although her primary affidavit filed 26 August 2025 (157 paragraphs) dealt with the husband's primary affidavit and submissions, further affidavits of the wife sought to reply to the affidavit of Mr AX; the affidavit of Ms AP; the affidavit of Mr AQ and (on 2 September 2025) the affidavit of Mr AY.

1. On 2 September 2025, I heard oral submissions from the parties.

1. It is proper to observe that the husband has a habit of filing applications and affidavits late and that such affidavits are usually voluminous, repetitive and a mixture (as is the material he has filed identified above), of asserted facts, hearsay and submissions. Although not a practitioner in the family law jurisdiction, his failure to observe basic canons of proper affidavit preparation is stark.
2. I accept this long litigation (not yet finished, with renewed parenting issues (despite my final Orders made 31 August 2022) listed for a further hearing before a Division 1 Judge in February 2026) has embroiled both parties in significant emotional grief, and finalisation of these property proceedings is imperative.
3. As the wife is now no longer legally represented, it is probably to be expected that her affidavits in response are shaped by the way the husband has argued his case.
4. Despite the husband's constant argument that he had insufficient time to prepare his property case and that by the last hearing day of the trial on 10 November 2023, he had lost confidence in his legal representation, the fact remains that he was, as was the wife, bound by the way in which they ran their case before me (Metwally v University of Wollongong [1985] HCA 28; (1985) 60 ALR 68). A clear example, as I noted in my earlier Reasons at [52], was when the husband's Counsel advised the Court on 10 November 2023 that he did not seek to rely upon an updated affidavit of Ms AP filed 2 November 2023.
5. It is appropriate, now that an Application to re-open has been filed, that the first part of these Reasons deal with that Application before turning to the form of orders that achieves justice and equity, relying on earlier findings made.

1. It is clear that the granting of leave to re-open is discretionary and is guided by the interests of justice, and as Murphy J expressed in Summitt & Summitt & Ors (Re-opening) [2009] FamCA 365 at [15] "...the essential question is, is the court more able to do justice in the facts and circumstances of the particular case if the application is granted" (footnotes omitted).
2. Relying on a decision of the Supreme Court of Queensland in EB v CT (No. 2) [2008] QSC 306, Murphy J in Summitt (supra) (at [17]) referred to other authorities and his Honour also referred (as did Mr Evans in his oral submissions) to the High Court authority of Smith v NSW Bar Association [1992] HCA 36; (1992) 176 CLR 256.
3. From those authorities, I distil the following principles (within the earlier articulated general essential question to be decided) that apply, namely:

(a) there is a public interest in maintaining the finality of litigation. Thus, if reasons for judgment have been given "the power [to re-open] is only exercised if there is some matter calling for review. And there may be more or less reluctance to exercise the power depending on whether there is an avenue for appeal" (Smith v NSW Bar Association (supra)) at [265];

(b) the principles governing the exercise of the discretionary power to re-open a case to adduce further evidence where the hearing has concluded but judgment has not been delivered, was said in Reid v Brett [2005] VSC 18 as follows:

(a) the further evidence is so material that the interests of justice require its admissions;

(b) the further evidence, if accepted, would most probably effect the result of the case;

(c) the further evidence could not by reasonable diligence have been discovered earlier;

(d) no prejudice would ensure to the other party by reason of the late submission of the further evidence

(c) in considering prejudice to the other party, and the guiding principle of the interests of justice, account is to be taken of the strain that litigation imposes on a personal litigant (EB v CT (No. 2) (supra)), which Murphy J observed at paragraph 19 "is particularly true of litigation in this Court generally".

1. I reminded the parties that the inability for the Court to pronounce orders on 28 March 2025 arose, in my view, from the significant gaps in the evidence, which, for reasons explained, meant that I required further evidence before I could pronounce final property adjustment orders.
2. As I explained to the parties on 2 September 2025, having made findings in the earlier Reasons, the Court is not permitted to alter those findings because a party "after the hearing" seeks to adduce new evidence that they could or should have adduced for the hearing.
3. As already noted, I am conscious of the reality in this case, that after final orders are pronounced, appeal rights for both parties are available.
4. The husband broadly contends that:

(a) the sales of three of the four Suburb G properties were delayed "due to the tenants causing significant damage to the properties which resulted in significant costs being incurred and significant time being spent" by the husband and family - which the husband estimates amounted to approximately "1701 combined hours" (see the husband's affidavit at paragraph 14) spent between July 2022 and December 2023 (paragraph 21);

(b) insurance claims were made but funds received were not sufficient to meet the costs of repairs and labour (paragraph 16);

(c) for the reasons set out at paragraph 20, the husband borrowed monies from his mother as his expenses and time taken "adversely affect[ed] the cash flow of my [business]";

(d) the wife failed to make full and complete disclosure of her income from two holiday properties (see generally paragraphs 27 to 62), and the husband (at paragraph 63 to 64) asserts he was not able to resist the matter being set down for hearing on 17 and 18 August 2023 because he was "once again...completely let down by my legal team" (paragraph 65);

(e) the hearing proceeded when he had "insufficient time" to complete accurate and updated personal tax returns or financials for the AW Trust (paragraph 69);

(f) at paragraphs 73 to 77, the husband seeks to adduce evidence from amended personal income tax returns for the years ending 30 June 2020 and 30 June 2021;

(g) at paragraphs 78 to 85, he raises issues relating to a "contested subpoena" hearing before a Registrar on 27 July 2023 - the point apparently being that the wife's failure to disclose led to the valuer of the holiday properties being misled;

(h) with a concluding submission at paragraphs 89 and 90, the husband says it was procedurally unfair to him for the trial to recommence as it did on 17 August 2023;

(i) the husband effectively concedes that before the trial recommenced (after the August adjournment) on 10 November 2023, his Application to adduce further evidence set out at paragraph 95, "did not proceed". The record will reveal that the Application was not pursued, and further cross-examination took place on 10 November 2023 of the husband and two valuers. The evidence was then concluded. Again, the husband contends that the trial should not have proceeded to conclusion on 10 November 2023;

(j) at paragraphs 105 to 118, the husband says the wife "knowingly misled the Court" and withheld information (particularly by not disclosing income being earned on the holiday properties);

(k) at paragraphs 119 to 140, the husband seeks to adduce further evidence about loans to his business from his parents. As these paragraphs reveal, loans for the Suburb G properties (as well as mortgage payments etc.) all ceased in December 2023 when settlement of the Suburb G property was effected. By the conclusion of the trial on 10 November 2023, the last property was (I recall) under contract for a settlement in December. As a result, at Appendix One of the Reasons, there was an uncertainty as to the available nett proceeds of sale. Doing the best I could at the time, the nett proceeds comprised of $532,532 + $263,789 (equity in the N Street property under contract) which equalled $769,321. The accepted evidence now is that $781,653.39 is held in trust;

(l) at paragraphs 141 to 152, reliant on advice from his accountant and now that he says he has more time to "reconcile expenses", he claims (at paragraph 151) the amount owed to him by the AD Trust is approximately $417,933.55 as at 30 June 2025, although the tax returns have not yet been fully completed "as further information is required";

(m) at paragraphs 153 to 159, including annexure "[MRH]-20", the husband seeks to adduce evidence of "unpaid labour and travel expenses for repairing and preparing the [Suburb G] properties for sale, between July 2022 and December 2023, owing by the [AD Trust]". Annexure "[MRH]-20", alleges (without any particularisation as to works performed) 189 hours for his father; 710.5 hours by the children - before he seeks to also claim travel expenses. It is to be noted that this "spreadsheet" only includes one attendance on 10 December 2023, that occurred after the trial finished on 10 November 2023;

(n) again, reliant on the evidence to be given by Mr AX on CGT liabilities, the husband says that should be taken into account, and he confirms that he expects the AD Trust to repay to him loans he has made to the Trust;

(o) at paragraphs 160 to 162, the husband says he relied upon evidence from a local real estate agent, Mr AY, as to the need to make repairs and maintenance on the Suburb G properties. The husband gives hearsay evidence (at paragraph 162) of what he says was the overall benefit to the parties. Again, I note all the Suburb G properties were sold or under contract at 10 November 2023; and

(p) at paragraphs 185 to 196, the husband gives evidence as to why he says he is not in "a financial or practical position to move out of the [L Street] property" until he is "repaid the funds which he has loaned to the [AD Trust]".

1. As to the witness affidavits the husband seeks to rely upon, I note that:

(a) the affidavit of Ms AP seeks to give evidence of loans she says she made to the husband's business general account, being:

(i) June 2018 to June 2020 - nett $270,000;

(ii) June 2020 to August 2021 - increased to nett $365,000;

(iii) July 2022 to October 2023 - increased to nett $465,000; and

(iv) 12 December 2023 to 16 August 2024 - increased to nett $575,000.

Furthermore, the affidavit, which the deponent says was prepared by her (not the husband - which noting the context, language and age of the deponent, I find surprising), seeks to make submissions on her son's behalf about the proceedings and the various stages of the litigation;

(b) the affidavit of Mr AQ seeks to give evidence of:

(i) outstanding loans totalling $20,000, the last $10,000 having been paid to the husband's business in May 2021; and

(ii) his assistance in labour and travel to the Suburb G properties prior to sale, being:

• (A) paragraphs 27 to 31 - Q Street;
• (B) paragraphs 32 to 35 and paragraphs 47 to 48 - T Street;
• (C) paragraphs 51 to 65 - S Street; and
• (D) paragraphs 69 to 84 - N Street.

Similar to the affidavit of Ms AP and for similar reasons, I find it surprising that Mr AQ asserts he prepared the affidavit, but in any event it contains hearsay, lay opinion evidence as to values and also submissions of a similar nature to those advanced by his son, the husband, in his affidavit and submission.

(c) the affidavit of Mr AY, a real estate agent who was involved with, I accept, the sale of the Suburb G properties either in terms of the Court Order of 19 July 2022, or by agreement between the parties. Mr AY explains at some length in his 209 paragraph affidavit (which he states he prepared - again unlikely) that he gave evidence about necessary repairs and maintenance. He says at paragraph 195 that "as a direct result of [Mr Humphrey] spending his own money and investing his own time with the assistance of his father and children, doing the hard work necessary to complete the repairs and maintenance in accordance with my recommendations" he adopts the husband's evidence in his affidavit - about the asserted "increases" in sale price. Leaving aside that Mr AY does not in anyway attribute any increase in C Valuations (at 23 March 2022) to any market forces in the locality, the admissibility of Mr AY's opinion is frankly, questionable. This is not helped by the clear tenor of the affidavit (he says he prepared) which advocates for the husband's position in matters where he would have no direct knowledge save for being told by the husband - for example, amounts spent on repairs and preparation after credits for insurance funds were received, and apparently being "absolutely astounded" that the husband had not been reimbursed for "expenses and hard work that [the husband] and his family put into" the properties;

(d) Mr AX, the husband's accountant, also claims he prepared his affidavit, comprising 178 paragraphs and 385 pages of annexures. It of course must be noted that, like all accountants, where no audit is undertaken, they must rely on the information provided by their client - in this case, the husband. I note Mr AX sadly indicates (at paragraph 2) that he has been unwell since 2022 and medical treatment in hospital between late April 2025 to July 2025 delayed his ability to provide an affidavit. With the caveats noted already, a summary of Mr AX's evidence is, inter alia, that:

(i) he gives a history of his involvement in the tax affairs of the parties since the 2004 financial year (at paragraph 4 to 30). He says at the time of the last property hearing in November 2023, the most recent AD Trust tax return and financial statements were for the 2021 financial year;

(ii) at paragraphs 21 to 30, Mr AX says he is instructed by the husband, that he loaned monies to the Trust and further, he is instructed, the husband borrowed funds from his mother (paragraph 31 to 32);

(iii) dealing with a Schedule of Labour and Travel Expenses (annexure "[MRAX]-1"), it seems, relying totally on the husband's instructions, he concludes the husband and his family spent a combined 1701 hours on the properties;

(iv) as evidence of his "advocacy" for the husband, he also adopts (at paragraph 61) the table of "increased values" opined by Mr AY;

(v) at paragraph 67, Mr AX says the loans secured over the properties were reduced;

(vi) considering the Court's desire was to have an accurate calculation of the CGT that at trial the husband estimated was in the vicinity of $177,731 (which was "notionally allowed" for in my calculation of the notional nett pool of $3,052,750 - see paragraph 84 to 86 of my Reasons), the evidence of Mr AX at paragraph 73 (relying on the analysis in the preceding paragraphs) that:

The net result of the capital income received after deduction of the accumulated tax losses given an overall capital gain for the [AD Trust] in the sum of $18,393.00 for the 2024 Financial Year, which is the amount that will incur income tax in the hands of the beneficiaries to which it is distributed for the 2024 Financial Year.

is significant - and in part answers the question raised in the Reasons for Judgment where I described (at paragraph 84) the figure for CGT of $171,731 as a "very rubbery figure";

(vii) Mr AX says (almost directs) the Court should:

• (A) determine how the husband should be repaid the sum of $417,933;
• (B) how distributions of the tax profit of $18,939 are to be paid;
• (C) consider the "significant post separation contributions" the husband has made;
• (D) how the funds held in Trust are to be distributed;
• (E) weigh up contributions to the various properties in the mathematical tax way he thinks and calculates is appropriate. In this regard, it is not clear if Mr AX has had an opportunity to read the Reasons for Judgment - and certainly there is no evidence Mr AX has any qualifications as to the interpretation of the statutory pathway (see paragraphs 74 to 105);

(viii) at paragraphs 106 to 117, Mr AX seeks to assist the Court with evidence as to how the husband may operate his business;

(ix) for the first time, noting the failure of the husband at the hearing to produce any reliable evidence of his business income stream (see paragraph 74(h) of my Reasons), Mr AX now seeks to do so at paragraphs 118 to 133;

(x) at paragraph 134, Mr AX refers to the partnership relating to the two manufactured homes. Why he chooses now to give evidence about events prior to the hearing being completed is somewhat of a mystery, however he seeks to "analyse" (purely based on information the husband now seeks to adduce) whether earlier partnership returns were correct (see paragraph 142) and complains that the wife, despite requests from Mr AX's firm, has failed to provide information or documentation requested. He asserts bravely at paragraph 154 that the wife's failure to disclose to him (and/or the husband) is a prima facie breach of her legal obligations (paragraph 154). He goes on to say that it is necessary to complete accurate partnership tax returns before individual tax returns are completed, and this is at least prejudicial to the husband (at paragraph 158). Surprisingly, it seems, despite uncertainties about the partnership income/loss, Mr AX confirms individual tax returns for the husband were filed for the 2020 and 2021 tax years - where a decrease in taxable income is now claimed by the husband;

(xi) at paragraphs 169 to 174, Mr AX explains that although tax returns and financial statements for the 2023 and 2024 financial years have been completed for the self-managed superannuation fund, the wife has not signed them as a trustee. Annexure "[MRAX]9" is returns for those two years - with the assets at 30 June 2024 comprising a term deposit of $250,561 and after adjustments, member benefits being estimated at:

• (A) the husband: $117,198.37; and
• (B) the wife: $133,125.57.

Later in these Reasons, I will refer to these benefits.

THE WIFE'S EVIDENCE AND SUBMISSIONS ON RE-OPENING

1. As earlier noted, the wife's self-prepared affidavits comprise her submissions against a re-opening of evidence - but there was also an important concession that the husband "be reimbursed the total sum of $30,000 in relation to the houses". Why the wife has adopted that sum becomes clear from her affidavit and oral submissions.
2. The wife's primary affidavit (containing her submissions) says broadly that the husband's application to re-open does not meet "the recognised threshold for re-opening" and primarily asserts that "the matters complained of were or could have been ventilated at trial with full disclosure and ample time, and no cogent expert evidence is identified that would likely produce a different result". In particular:

(a) at paragraphs 23 to 31, the wife gives a short yet broadly accurate history - in which she says the husband caused delays in January 2020 because of late disclosure; the proceedings were re-opened on the wife's application in early 2022 and resumed to permit further evidence to be tested, in August 2023 and then November 2023. The wife also sets out her views about the continuing parenting proceedings;

(b) at paragraphs 48 to 56, the wife responds to the allegations that she has acted fraudulently and has not made full disclosure. In particular, she refers to the husband having access to subpoenaed material from AR Company, her employer, which he received before the resumed trial on 10 November 2023;

(c) the wife could only produce documents within her possession, custody or control and could not produce documents "belonging to third parties" (paragraph 52);

(d) there was no non-disclosure to the property valuer, Mr AL, who was, in any event, the subject of cross-examination at the hearing;

(e) allegations of breaches by the wife of the Partnership Act and/or Income Tax Assessment Act were not raised at the trial and are denied. The wife says, at paragraphs 58 and 68, that she has not been "the subject of any charge, investigation or adverse finding" by any regulatory body in respect of the alleged "breaches";

(f) at paragraph 82, the wife points to the husband's "repeated tardiness and his sudden 'discovery' of alleged expenses many years after the relevant period". This is a failure of the husband. Mr AX's illness cannot justify the late disclosure to the wife and the Court;

(g) the husband has still not disclosed "work-in-progress details for the 15 or so '[business activities]" the husband claimed to be running (paragraph 86);

(h) the wife does not dispute that the husband "has at all times maintained control of the properties held in the [AD Trust], both before and after separation", however the four Suburb G properties were sold between October 2022 and October 2023 (paragraph 93). The husband always received "the rental income from these properties, paid the outgoings, made repeated insurance claims, arranged real estate inspections and claimed to have incurred significant annual repair costs" (paragraph 95);

(i) Consent Orders made on 19 July 2022 provided a timeline for the sale of the Suburb G properties and, in particular, Order 6(j)(iv) provided for "any agreed repair or agreed renovation costs..." to be reimbursed to the party who made payment from the sale proceeds. At paragraph 40 of the husband's affidavit sworn 18 July 2022, the husband proposed to "cap the cost of the repairs and minor renovations at $7,500 per property or no more than $30,000 combined for all 4 properties" (paragraph 115);

(j) The sales of the properties took longer than ordered by the Court and the wife alleges the husband "chose to conduct more major renovations (beyond simple repairs) without [the wife's] consent - resulting in increased costs and longer timelines" (paragraph 117);

(k) Where the wife says the husband has not made full disclosure about repairs and insurance claims, the wife (at paragraph 119) for finality, proposes that the husband's reimbursement be capped at $30,000;

(l) The findings made by the Court (at paragraphs 51 to 55) of the Reasons for Judgment should still apply and the husband should not be permitted to adduce evidence from his parents which subsequently could have been adduced at the hearing (paragraphs 123 to 128);

(m) The evidence of alleged loans to AD Trust were available at the hearing, but the husband did not explain them and how they interacted with loans to his business and/or for legal expenses (at paragraph 133);

(n) Payments towards the children were expressly taken into account by the Court in the Reasons for Judgment (paragraph 137);

(o) At paragraphs 139 to 146, the wife felt compelled to give evidence about the parenting issues. I regard that evidence (as I did the husband's attempts to do so) as irrelevant to these property proceedings being "re-opened"; and

(p) The wife's "summary" at paragraphs 148 to 156 speak to why the wife contends that the application to re-open should be refused, and why finality is imperative.

1. The wife's other reply affidavits have been considered, but the wife's responses are generally covered by the primary affidavit.

DETERMINATION OF THE HUSBAND'S APPLICATION TO RE-OPEN

1. Applying the principles earlier identified in the exercise of my discretion, I have reached a conclusion that the husband's application to re-open should be allowed on a limited basis, so as to permit him to rely upon:

(a) the evidence he provides, in part confirmed by the evidence of Mr AX, that, after allowance for the recoveries or successful insurance claims, the amounts spent on repairs and preparation for sale by the husband were:

(i) the jointly owned property at Q Street, Suburb R in the sum of $6,920;

(ii) the three properties owned by the AW Trust, being:

• (A) T Street - $5,349.49;
• (B) S Street - $22,961.05; and
• (C) N Street - $23,566.79.

(b) The evidence of Mr AX, limited to his assessment that currently:

(i) the financials of the Trust at 30 June 2024 reveal a debt owed to the husband of $417,933 - although the evidence is far from clear how purported loans to the husband's business by his parents were ultimately "loaned" to the Trust and why that was necessary to the extent alleged;

(ii) the taxable profit for the Trust, in effect the capital gain, amounts to $18,939 (and not $177,731);

(iii) the member benefits of the parties at 30 June 2024 in the self-managed superannuation fund should be:

• (A) the husband - $117,198.37; and
• (B) the wife - $133,125.57

1. The husband is not permitted to re-open to rely upon the other evidence in respect of the following matters, for the reasons indicated:

(a) The husband generally has sought to try and "fill gaps" in his case identified in the Reasons for Judgment, when such evidence was available to him at the time of the completion of the hearing in November 2023, in particular:

(i) seeking to adduce evidence of alleged time spent on works on the investment properties (and for travelling to those properties), not only by himself but his father and the children - who were minors at the time. The spreadsheet he now produces is an attempt to try and bolster an argument for a greater non-financial post separation contribution. Having his parents, the real estate agent and his accountant merely repeating the husband's evidence does not corroborate his position;

(ii) the Court has made findings about why loans the husband says he received from his parents to his business would not be included in the balance sheet. The husband has attempted to now adduce further evidence, not only "updating" the sums said to be owed but trying to challenge the finding. He should not be permitted to do so, within the parameters of the principles for re-opening;

(iii) the husband continues to fail to explain or attempt to adequately explain how his business operates and how what he says are substantial loans made to his business by his parents, found their way to the Trust. The Court is not satisfied the evidence of his parents, all available at the time of the hearing, should be adduced now. Furthermore, most of his parents' evidence is inadmissible hearsay, lay opinion or submissions;

(iv) the evidence of real estate agent Mr AY similarly includes hearsay, lay opinion (as to alleged reasons why the prices obtained at the time of sale exceed the earlier expert valuation evidence) and submissions;

(v) the husband's quest for further information about income the wife received from the rental of the holiday properties was the subject of subpoenae filed by him and was an issue dealt with at the hearing. He cannot now try to make further submissions on that issue when his Counsel had the opportunity to do so on 10 November 2023. In my assessment, any evidence of the wife's income (a topic about which the husband seems fixated) would have no effect on the exercise of discretion. The findings about how the holiday properties should be valued have been made; and

(vi) each party has their own obligation to comply with the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (Cth). It seems the wife is content she has done so. Taxation returns (including adjusted returns) have been now prepared by the husband. How they choose to report their income or loss in respect of the "partnership" or for that matter, any capital gain arising from the sale of the jointly owned property at Q Street, is a matter for them. I agree with the wife's submissions in this regard.

1. The limited further evidence which the Court will allow to be adduced, as I will demonstrate, is relevant to achieving justice and equity whilst accepting the need to achieve finality.
2. I am not persuaded that the interests of justice are better served by allowing the application to re-open beyond the limited basis identified.
3. Of course, I accept that finality in the property proceedings depends on the actions taken by either party within the time limits prescribed to appeal any final orders made, which I propose to pronounce today.

SO, WHAT ORDERS ACHIEVE JUSTICE AND EQUITY ON THE EXPANDED EVIDENCE?

1. It follows that the additional evidence permits the pool of interests to be adjusted and to be more accurate whilst consistent with earlier findings published.
2. As the oral submissions made on 2 September 2025 demonstrate, the issue of what allowance should be made for actual expenditure by the husband on the investment properties was a contested issue - in part also identified by the wife's "concession" that she would allow a total sum of $30,000 - whilst the husband claims a sum of $58,797.23.
3. I propose to allow the husband to be reimbursed, from the funds held in trust, the sum of $58,797.23 because:

(a) the Orders made 19 July 2022 permitted the party who paid expenses to be reimbursed, and the wife concedes the husband, who controlled the properties, did so;

(b) the wife's complaint is that the husband failed to obtain her "agreement" as to a number of expenses. The husband says, by way of example, on 22 December 2022, his solicitors sought reimbursement in respect of costs incurred for Q Street, but that the wife unreasonably refused to agree. It is to be observed that the Q Street property settled in October 2022. The husband says he continued to pursue insurance claims and use those proceeds and other funds to make repairs and renovations to the remaining three investment properties;

(c) where these parties find it impossible to agree on almost anything, I find the intent of the Order of 19 July 2022 was to effect a sale of the properties and that (as the husband had control of the process) the husband could perform reasonable repairs etc;

(d) the difference between the parties as to the nett expenditure on repairs is $28,797 - or less than 1% of the divisible pool; and

(e) justice is not served in my view by spending more time permitting every invoice to be examined and dissected. In allowing the husband to be reimbursed from the sale proceeds of the investment properties, I also take into account that the sale prices exceeded the estimates of value given by the expert - however I am not satisfied this is only because of the repairs. Although the wife complains about delays in selling, there is no allegation that fair market value was not achieved when sold.

1. The wife attached to her affidavit sworn 7 April 2025, and for the first time produced to the Court, a trust account statement as at 4 April 2025 (annexure "A") which records various deposits and withdrawals. Leaving aside withdrawals for interim distributions already taken into account in Appendix One to these Reasons, the trust account statement relevantly reveals:

Deposit of $162,650.56, being proceeds of sale of Q Street (jointly owned) - that deposit had been reduced to $42,650.56 by 9 May 2023 when partial distributions of $60,000 to each party had been made. On this basis, $42,650.56 of the trust funds were the remaining joint funds.

Deposit of $257,945.34 being nett proceeds of sale of T Street.

Deposit of $268,217.81 being nett proceeds of sale of S Street

Deposit of $2,252.05 being Balance of Deposit on S Street

Withdrawal of $1,760 for survey carried out on K Street

Further withdrawals from Trust to make interim distributions to each party of $20,000

Deposit of $249,120.58 being nett proceeds of sale of N Street

1. The balance available in Trust now, as set out in the Statement, is $781,653.39.
2. An examination of the entries in the trust account statement supports the following findings:

(a) To some degree, the current balance represents a mixture of funds - available to the parties jointly (from the Q Street sale) and available to the Trust from the three other investment properties; and

(b) Doing the best I can, and without submissions to assist, if the nett funds of $42,650.56 were available to the parties as joint owners of Q Street, then those funds were fully used by:

1. On this basis, I am satisfied that the balance held in the trust account of $781,653.39 represents funds held entirely on behalf of the AW Trust.
2. If the husband is reimbursed for expenses of $58,797 from monies in trust, although I accept this includes expenses of $6,920 for Q Street, then the balance of the loan due to the husband will be approximately $359,136 ($417,933 less $58,797). The husband can, it appears, receive a repayment of this loan from the AW Trust without any further tax consequences.
3. With $417,933 distributed to the husband from funds in trust, that would leave a balance of $363,720 available to AW Trust ($781,653 less $417,933).
4. The parties have not clarified how these funds can be removed from the Trust, but after allowance for the taxable capital gain (after offsetting carried forward capital losses) of $18,939, doing the best I can on the evidence, a balance is available for distribution of approximately $344,781.
5. On the basis of the evidence and earlier findings, Appendix One to these Reasons is the balance sheet/pool of interests I now adopt.
6. Ignoring for the moment the distinction in ownership between the parties personally and the interest in the residue of funds held on behalf of the AD Trust, and adjusting the notional calculation of the parties' 50% entitlement now of a pool of interests assessed to be $3,145,206 (previously set out at [85] and [86] of the Reasons for Judgment), I find that:

(a) the wife's 50% of the nett pool of $3,145,206 equates to $1,572,603 made up as follows:

(b) the husband's 50% of the nett pool of $3,145,206 equates to $1,572,603 made up as follows:

• - Allowance for CGT and AD Pty Ltd financial returns

1. A distribution of the balance of funds available in trust on behalf of the AD Trust of $722,856 would occur as follows:

1. The husband is given credit in the proposed distribution for meeting the potential CGT, which I allow at a figure of $20,000 to cover exigencies including for completing financial statements and tax returns for the Trust. Whether he chooses to withdraw the funds or leave in the monies in the Trust is a matter for him.
2. As the husband claims, after reimbursement of the repair expenses, he is still owed $363,720, I find at least to that extent he can access funds held by the AD Trust he can repay this "loan". Frankly, the husband has failed to produce reliable and admissible evidence that other than for the incidence of possible CGT, any adverse tax consequences arise from distribution of funds held in the Trust - a trust the husband controls and where both the husband and wife are discretionary beneficiaries both as to capital and income (see Trust Deed dated 28 September 2005).
3. Accordingly, the orders provide for the husband to retain control of the funds left in trust after payment to the wife of $594,006.
4. I regard the Orders which alter the parties' interests in the pool of interests as set out, achieves justice and equity in this matter.
5. To the extent that the husband asserts he gets less cash from the available funds, his insistence, which I agree with, that he retain the former matrimonial home with an equity of over $1,230,000, invites the finding, which I make, that he has some flexibility as to whether he chooses to maintain the operation of the AD Trust or use his equity in K Street to borrow funds. In this regard, the lack of disclosure about the status of his business makes it impossible to assess his capacity to borrow - save to observe the only debt to a commercial lender he has to service, is the secured mortgage over the K Street property.
6. I will order that the husband vacate the property he uses as his office at L Street, by 31 December 2025. The husband has known the likelihood of the wife retaining this property since the trial completed in November 2023 and certainly since my Reasons for Judgment were delivered on 28 March 2025.
7. It is a small business and, whilst I accept he has some office equipment and files to move, if he does not desire to work from his home, then he has more than sufficient time to find either a serviced office or another rental accommodation. Further delays in vacating the L Street property for the reasons the husband asserts are not justified, in my view. The wife says she may choose to live there, which will be her right. Clearly, with the funds she receives, she would be able to discharge the mortgages over the L Street property of approximately $287,920.
8. For the Reasons now published, the orders which appear at the commencement of these Reasons do achieve justice and equity for both parties.

1. At [91]-[92] of my earlier Reasons for Judgment, the issue of costs was raised.
2. Although no costs issues arise from the determination of the Application to re-open, where both parties were unrepresented, now that final orders have been made, either party might seek to pursue a costs application for the substantive property proceedings.
3. Having raised the reserved costs issues previously, at paragraph 24 of the wife's submissions filed 7 April 2025, the wife contended that:
   1. With respect to the queries concerning costs set out at paragraph 92 of the Reasons for Judgment, the Wife's responses are:
      1. The Wife seeks to pursue her 2 live costs applications, namely:
         1. That contained in the Application in a Case (as it then was) filed 24 February 2020, with respect to the adjournment of the trial in January 2020 ("the 2020 application"); and
         2. That made orally by Ms Oakley of Counsel on 18 August 2023, with respect to the adjournment of the reopened trial in August 2023.
      2. In respect of the 2020 application:

i. The Wife filed written submissions on 13 February 2020;

1. No further submissions are sought to be made by the Wife; and

   1. In respect of the 2023 application:

i. The Wife filed submissions on 11 September 2023; and

ii. No further submissions are sought to be made.

1. The Wife does not seek to otherwise pursue any reserved costs Orders; and
2. The Wife does not seek to otherwise pursue any other costs Orders including with respect to the substantive property proceedings, though, in the event that the Husband pursues any costs Orders, the Wife would seek to be heard in response to them (and such response may include a cross-application for costs).

which I take as a possible need to respond to an application for costs in respect of the substantive proceedings, by the husband.

1. In an attempt to clarify the position on costs, on 2 September 2025 I ordered that by 4.00pm on 8 September 2025, each party was to file a memorandum as to their position in relation to costs, and:

(a) the husband filed memorandum to costs on 8 September 2025 and submissions on 15 September 2023 (in respect only of the August 2023 adjournment); and

(b) the wife by way of email to chambers served a memorandum on 4 September, attaching costs submissions (which have previously been filed) dated 12 February 2020; 11 September 2023 and 7 April 2025.

1. Either party has, under r 12.13 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021, 28 days in which to file an application for costs arising from the final Orders now made. If no application is filed within the timelines, I will prepare, complete and publish reasons in respect of the two "live" costs applications, noting again the husband has filed no submissions in response.

I certify that the preceding fifty (50) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Baumann.

Furniture and household contents (including the husband's bicycle and storage facility contents)

Sale proceeds of Suburb G properties held on trust by the husband's lawyers (less reimbursement to the husband for repair expenses of $58,797)

Interim releases of funds to the husband in October 2022 and May 2023

Interim releases of funds to the wife in October 2022 and May 2023 (portion spent on legal costs)

NOTIONAL GROSS ASSETS (BEFORE SUPERANNUATION)

Allowance for Capital Gains Tax and accounting fees

CBA Viridian Line of Credit [...] Account No ending...57 (secured against the L Street property)

CBA Complete Home Loan [...] Account No ending...08 (secured against the K Street property)

CBA Complete Home Loan [...] Account No ending...00 (secured against the L Street property)

Husband's interest in the parties' SMSF - AS Holdings Trust, of which AS Pty Ltd is Trustee) (as at 30 June 2022)

Wife's interest in the parties' SMSF - AS Holdings Trust, of which AS Pty Ltd is Trustee) (as at 30 June 2022)