Relationship property division — post separation contributions — economic disparity — Property (Relationships) Act 1976, ss 15, 18B, 25 & 27 — Sutton v Bell [2017] NZHC 2370, [2017] NZFLR 779 — Laurence v Baker [2013] NZHC 2378 — S v W (2009) BCL 256 (HC) — X v X [2009] NZCA 399 — Scott v Williams [2017] NZSC 185, [2018] 1 NZLR 507 — Jack v Jack [2014] NZHC 1495. The parties appeared in Court to resolve the division of relationship property following 20 years of marriage. Both parties were from Yugoslavia (as it then was) and emigrated to New Zealand shortly before their marriage. The parties were before the Court to determine several relationship property issues: an occupation order concerning the family home, and whether there should be any occupational rent adjustment or any other post-separation adjustments. The Judge dismissed the respondent's application for occupation, concluding that each party would have the means to arrange housing for the children upon sale of the family home. The Court ruled that the respondent was permitted to stay in the home until December to prevent disruption to the children's school year. The respondent claimed economic disparity as a result of the applicant's MBA, completed while the respondent supported the family in the latter part of their marriage. Compensation was sought to redress the applicant's ability to earn significant income and difference in living standards that this created and a contingency of 25 per cent was set, fixing the compensation sought at $77,135.78. The Judge found that an adjustment in respect of occupation rent was appropriate, calculated from six months post separation until the sale date of the family home, at a rate of $550 per week to be paid by the respondent to the applicant. Other post separation adjustments were divided as separate property, aside from outstanding parking fines which were to be shared equally. Judgment Date: 24 May 2019.