Stacks Law Firm is a leading Australian legal service provider with more than 250 people operating locally in many Australian communities.
We are committed to supporting the legal needs of everyday Australians and businesses across every stage of life.
Wife buys winning lottery ticket after separating from
husband
The couple had been married for 20 years at the time of
separation in July 2008. They had two adult children and owned real
estate together.
In early 2009, six months after they had separated and while
they were still negotiating the terms of the property settlement
between them, the wife purchased a lottery ticket and won $6
million.
The husband contended that the wife had purchased the lottery
ticket with "joint funds", he had therefore contributed
to the winnings and they should be considered a joint asset of the
marriage. The husband sought 50% of his ex-wife's lottery
winnings.
The wife disagreed, and the matter came before the Family Court
for a determination on this and other matters that were in dispute
between the couple.
Trial judge divides parties' assets into two pools
At trial, Her Honour Judge Stevenson divided the parties'
property into two pools.
Pool 1 consisted of the parties' asset pool at the time of
separation, which had a net value of $2,437,990. Pool 2 consisted
of the wife's winnings and assets derived post-separation. This
pool by that time had a net value of $3,368,530.
Her Honour divided Pool 1 equally (50:50), with each party
receiving approximately $1.2 million.
Her Honour determined that although the husband made no
contribution to the post-separation winnings, he was entitled to
$500,000 or 10% of Pool 2 (90:10) due to factors such as the large
disparity in the parties' financial resources and the
husband's limited employment.
The husband appealed this decision to the Full Court of the
Family Court.
case a - The case for the husband
case b - The case for the wife
The trial judge was wrong to divide the marital property into
two pools to distinguish between the lottery winnings and the other
property. My ex-wife bought the lottery ticket with joint funds,
therefore the winnings should be part of an overall asset
pool.
Given that I owned several properties when we got married, I
should have received at least 66% of the other property. Giving me
only 50% of Pool 1 was plainly wrong.
The trial judge was wrong in finding that I should have sole
responsibility for the business in which my ex-wife and I were
partners. The business has incurred a loss over the last three
years, the only option is to sell it and it is unfair that I should
be solely responsible for disposing of it.
My ex-wife has $1.2 million in unexplained expenditure since
2009. This amount should be added back as a notional asset against
my ex-wife as part of the asset split.
The money I used to buy the lottery ticket did not come from
"joint funds", it was my money. At the time of the win my
ex-husband and I were leading separate lives and were financially
independent of one another.
There was money owing on the properties my husband owned at the
time we married. If this were not the case, he would have produced
evidence to prove the properties were unencumbered. He did not do
this.
I have had nothing to do with the business in the last five
years. It is fair for my husband to continue with the sole
responsibility and decision-making for the business that he's
exercised over this period.
I have accounted for the bulk of my expenditure since 2009. The
remaining amount is far less than my husband's unexplained
expenditure.
So, which case won?
Cast your judgment below to find out
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.