Students spend $225,000 in 26 months fighting over a car in a spiteful end to their 19 month marriage
EXCLUSIVE: A WARRING student couple’s fight over a car has lasted longer than their brief marriage and cost three times as much as the vehicle was worth.
Law & Order
Don't miss out on the headlines from Law & Order. Followed categories will be added to My News.
A YOUNG Melbourne couple have spent $225,000 fighting over a car in a spiteful divorce settlement that has lasted longer than the time they spent as husband and wife.
The pair, both aged in their 20s, spent the past 26 months arguing over the carve-up of their short lived 19 month marriage, spending a small fortune on legal fees.
The court heard most of the couple’s $1 million assets were contributed by the wife’s family and the only real issue for determination was who should get $77,000 from the sale of a luxury “German car”.
“Ms Liu” — a court given pseudonym — argued she should keep everything, while her ex-husband, “Mr Bai”, claimed he should get the proceeds from the car as it had been registered in his name.
In a scathing assessment of the pair’s standoff, Family Court Justice Sharon Johns said: “On any view, both parties gained nothing from the pursuit of this litigation.
“In the aftermath, the parties have expended amounts on their lawyers greater than the sum in dispute and each has suffered the indignity of a two-day hearing.”
Justice Johns found both parties had tried to mislead the court, with Ms Liu increasing the length and cost of proceedings by creating and executing backdated documents to bolster a later abandoned claim that her mother’s contributions were loans, while Mr Bai was misleading about his employment and income.
“Such is the animus between these parties that each preferred to expend significant sums on their lawyers, in the wife’s case more than double the amount actually sought by the husband, and devote more than two years of their lives to the pursuit of this litigation rather than resolve their dispute prior to trial.
“That this is so reflects poorly on both parties; their desire to save face has overridden commercial realities and common sense.”
MORE:
‘WILDLIFE WARRIORS’ GO TO COURT TO STOP KANGAROO CULL
ANTI-WAR PROTESTERS SUE THE DEFENCE FORCE OVER ABUSE CLAIM
In the end, Justice Johns ruled Mr Bai should get four per cent or $42,480 of the asset pool — just over half the $77,000 car sale proceeds he had sought.
Ms Bai was given the remaining $34,520 from the car sale — almost five times less than her legal costs.
Justice Johns said neither party was likely to be happy as their contributions to the marriage had exceeded $1.2 million but only $1,062,000 was left to be divided.
Ms Liu, born in China and living in Australia on a student visa, told the court her legal fees would amount to $160,000.
Mr Bai, also a student and recent Australian citizen, was self-represented for much of the proceedings and put his legal costs at $66,000.
The court heard the couple’s home was bought by Ms Liu with $800,000 from her mother; and a franchise business which the pair ran until selling it for a $45,000 profit, was purchased with a $300,000 advance from Liu’s family.
Ms Liu’s mother also provided $122,000 to purchase the German car.
The court heard Mr Bai’s family had provided some $60,000, including for a Japanese car that was sold for $11,000 when the German car was purchased.