The husband denied that his snoring was an issue between the parties. I do not accept his evidence in that regard. The husband complained of a lack of intimacy after the marriage and/or the change to its quality and/or quantity. I prefer the wife’s evidence on the issue.
In any event any change in the nature of intimacy between parties when they marry is not an indication of fraud, coercion or unconscionable conduct. It is indicative of normal human behaviour. The nature any of intimate relationship of couples will almost invariable change over the years of cohabitation. These parties were not in the ‘first blush’ of their relationship in 2005, they had commenced living together about eight year’s previously.
I am satisfied that it was not the case that the husband was infatuated to the loss of sensibility. Nor was it the case that he was lured into the Agreement by the wife’s use of intimate relations. Even if I had accepted the husband’s evidence that the intimate relations between the parties diminished substantially after their marriage (which I do not), I would not have concluded that that was indicative of fraud, unconscionable conduct or undue influence. It would not seem to be unusual in human behaviour, that intimacy may wax and wane throughout a relationship. The husband may not be the first of his gender to complain that intimacy diminished after marriage. That change, by itself, does not necessarily lead to a conclusion of fraud or unconscionable behaviour on the part of a wife.