He brought in property and bought a business: 57.5% to him

Mr and Ms Charles were together from about 2002 until early 2013, spent about a year apart, reconciled, and finally separated in about September 2016. They had two children. He came into the relationship owning two properties, bought before they lived together; she had a car, five head of livestock and a horse. Together they bought two adjoining rural properties in 2004 and 2012, largely with loans, some from his parents. He worked as a tradesman and later in transport, and paid the mortgages. She worked mostly part time, spent her wages on the household and the children, was the main carer and homemaker, and did most of the farm work, about 20 hours a week. Months before separation he bought a transport business for $305,000, entirely on vendor finance.

By the 2023 trial the net pool was $949,161 including super. He asked Judge Newbrun to quarantine his own properties and the business, and sought 75% on contributions; she sought 50%. The judge refused to quarantine: through her parenting and the wages she spent on the family she had indirectly helped him pay for them. Contributions were assessed at 60% to him and 40% to her.

On future needs, he earns about $141,000 a year, keeps the business and has $115,000 in super against her $30,333. She earns about $30,000 and has two young children with a new partner, who earns about $100,000 and pays most of the boarding school fees for her younger child with Mr Charles. Weighing all of this, the judge moved only 2.5% her way, for a final 57.5% to him and 42.5% to her.

She keeps the two jointly owned properties and the livestock; he keeps his own properties, the business and the debt to his parents. She must pay him $58,213 within three months, or one property will be sold.