Australia's #1 for Law

Join 11,000+ Australians. Ask a question, respond to a question and better understand the law today!

QLD Newly-Purchased Assets Part of Property Settlement with Ex?

Discussion in 'Family Law Forum' started by Over_It, 30 December 2015.

  1. Over_It

    Over_It Member

    30 December 2015
    Likes Received:
    Hello, everyone. First-time poster here.:)

    After months spent reading, researching, and dealing with an affidavit construction, I'm hoping to get a definitive answer regarding when new assets are not considered part of the joint property pool, for property settlement. While I know that anything post - separation, and up to settlement are included, I'm trying to work out when up to is considered.

    It's the 'before' property settlement is the part that I'm struggling with here - does this mean before it's been filed for, or before it's been finalised?

    My new partner has been trying to get his ex to come to an agreement outside of the courts for over a year. She has ignored a number of direct requests for independent mediation, then avoided complying with a request from his (and then even her own) solicitor for financial disclosure and mediation, and this resulted in finally having to file with the courts to try and push for a resolution. The affidavit that has been filed contains evidence of all of this.

    Even after filing with the courts (a few months ago), she has not replied or responded to the affidavit (the 14-day response time has well and truly elapsed), and we are now waiting for the court date to come around (it's been almost a 4-month wait between filing with the court, and the actual court appearance in early February 2016). It is highly likely that she won't show up to court, and even if she does, she won't comply with anything either - so this whole situation will continue to drag on for (what feels like) an eternity.

    So, does this now mean that, until the court has finalised the settlement, which could take at least another year (or more), he still can't purchase any new 'assets' for use within our relationship, and we can't purchase a house together, either, as we are at risk of the new property being considered part of the property pool that can be accessed by his ex? :(

    Why is it that the woman who walked out on him 4-years ago still gets to have so much 'reach' into his new life? She gets to ignore all the requests and, thereby, constantly delay a resolution, and this means that he/we/I can't move on with any of our plans because she can't be bothered dealing with anything. Grrrrrr :mad:
  2. Sophea

    Sophea Well-Known Member

    16 April 2014
    Likes Received:
    Not necessarily. It is true that any asset of either party, whether held solely in their name, or jointly with a third party that is acquired pre settlement may be included in the asset pool for distribution, however it does not mean that asset will be taken off them and awarded to the other party. The interest that they hold after being identified will need to be valued, and it is then included in the balance sheet when assessing the total net asset pool. Therefore if the court determined that your partner used funds to buy a home which should have been % apportioned with his ex, he would merely need to pay that out to her in cash, not give her a share in the home.

    If the money used on the home is money made post separation by him, then there is also a chance the court will deem that to be his income which is not apportionable with the ex.
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  3. Clancy

    Clancy Well-Known Member

    6 April 2016
    Likes Received:
    This is an interesting thread. About 6 months after my ex moved out, she bought a brand new car. Recently when her lawyer sent a settlement offer, I noticed the car and the car loan on the list.

    The car and the car loan has nothing whatsoever to do with me, why is it showing on the paperwork? I am wondering what is to stop me running out and buying new cars, etc. if its somehow to my advantage in all this? It seems ridiculous?

Share This Page