They logged every house payment, and still split 50/50

Mr and Ms Beyer moved in together in late 2010, in a Canberra house he had bought the year before for $364,000. They married in 2015 and separated on 31 December 2019. They had no children. At first both worked full time as professionals on similar incomes.

They kept their money unusually separate. In 2012 they signed a financial agreement, and for years they recorded every contribution to the house in an Excel spreadsheet that he kept up to date. Marrying in 2015 meant the agreement no longer bound them. From 2013 he left his job to study and renovate the house. She kept working, and he accepted that without her wage the family's finances would have been more difficult.

At trial he first asked for 63% of everything, then argued for about 53 to 55% plus a further 2.5%. She asked for 55% of the assets other than super, and for their super to be equalised.

Judge Eldershaw accepted that he had put in more money at the start. But the spreadsheet showed their contributions to the house were equal by April 2021, so counting his early money again would be double counting. Her savings, and the super she built while he was studying, favoured her by 5%. He had done more of the renovation work in 2010, mostly before they moved in together, which was worth 2.5% to him. He was nearly 52 and she was 44, so he had less time to rebuild his super: another 2.5% to him. The adjustments cancelled out.

Because he held most of the cash and she held most of the super, the judge divided the two pools separately. Each was split equally: $887,719 net outside super, mostly the $725,000 house, and $437,543 of super. He keeps the house if he pays her $259,237 by 1 May 2023; otherwise it is sold. A super split gives him $43,931 from her fund.