Australia does not require a showing of fault in order to be granted a divorce. For instance, you do not have to show adultery, abandonment, abuse, or anything else to be eligible to apply for divorce. You simply must prove that the marriage has broken down irretrievably, by showing that you have lived apart with the intent to sever the relationship for twelve consecutive months.
Once you have satisfied the twelve-month separation requirement, you may file an application for divorce. You may do so individually or jointly, however should you file individually you will need to serve your ex spouse with the appropriate paperwork. After valid service of process there will be a hearing, and the court will either grant or deny your application for divorce. If the order is granted, it will automatically become effective one month after it is issued.
Divorce is fairly straightforward, and simply denotes the end of a marriage. The process is easy to follow, and the necessary forms can be found online or you can have a lawyer apply for a divorce on your behalf at www.divorce-online.com.au.
Should you anticipate that your divorce would involve more complex issues or questions related to property division, custody and maintenance, then contact Mathews Family Law to discuss your situation with a specialist family law attorney today.
In Australia, the law affords some protection to couples that have chosen not to get married, yet lead the life of a married couple, including same-sex relationships. Whether you chose not go get married out of convenience, or for religious reasons, you can take comfort in knowing that should you separate, you are entitled to similar protection under the law as if you were married.
It is worth noting that the rules regarding de facto relationships may vary slightly depending on the state or territory, so this article will focus on the federal law laid out in the Family Law Act of 1975.
A de facto relationship exists when two people are not legally married to each other, not related by family, and regarding the circumstances of their relationship, they carry on as a couple living together on a genuine domestic basis. In determining whether a de facto relationship exists, the court will look at a myriad of factors laid out in the Family Law Act, including:
the duration of the relationship;
the nature and extent of their common residence;
whether a sexual relationship exists;
the degree of financial dependence or interdependence, and any arrangements for financial support;
the ownership, use and acquisition of their property;
the degree of mutual commitment to a shared life;
whether the relationship is or was registered under a prescribed law of a State or Territory as a prescribed kind of relationship;
the care and support of children;
the reputation and public aspects of the relationship.
In order to receive the benefits awarded to de facto relationships under The Family Law Act, the parties must have engaged in a de facto relationship for at least two years (except if there is a child of the relationship or one party made substantial financial contributions).
Recent Changes – Family Law Amendment Act 2008
The Family Law Amendment Act was given Royal Assent in November of 2008 and greatly impacts de facto couples. The amendment brought these relationships under the purview of the federal law and allows them to be treated the same as married couples. The major change brought about by the amendment is that the financial settlement regime was extended to both same sex and heterosexual de facto relationships.
The amendment allows parties to a de facto relationship to seek declaratory relief in relation to their relationship and property, seek maintenance orders, seek property adjustment orders, and the amendment allows de facto couples to enjoy superannuation splitting and financial agreements.
The amendment does not affect de facto couples whose date of separation came prior to March 1, 2009; those relationships are not subject to the laws of the federal system, and are limited to relief awarded under state and territory laws. The date of separation is the sole determining factor as to whether a de facto relationship is governed by state or federal law. Should your de facto relationship have ended prior to this 2009 date, there is one way you may still have access to the federal law. If you and your partner make an unconditional choice to opt in to the federal legislation, and you satisfy the following elements, your separation can fall under the purview of the federal law.
There must be no current order about property or maintenance.
There must be no agreement between the parties enforceable under the state law in existence.
The parties must consent in writing.
The parties must have received independent legal advice as to the advantages and disadvantages of making the choice.
The parties must have received a signed statement confirming the advice from their lawyer.
Generally, this exception is no longer applicable because The Family Law Act has placed a two-year limitation on the institution of matrimonial causes. So, had your de facto relationship ended before March 1, 2009, but no legal action was filed within two years then you would not be eligible for any relief.
Each of the following subsections highlights the relief available to de facto couples thanks to this 2008 amendment.
De Facto Relationships and Property Settlement
The Family Law Act makes little difference between property settlement amongst formerly married couples, and those who were in a de facto relationship. For all intents and purposes, the courts are to treat property settlement issues for married and de facto couples the same, and the language under the Family Law Act is nearly identical.
For an in depth analysis regarding property division, please see the articles in our property settlement centre. With regard to property settlement issues, just know that there is no real distinction between the way the law treats married couples and those who were in de facto relationships. The way that creditors, bankruptcy trustees, and property orders are treated is practically identical.
De Facto Relationships and Maintenance
Similar to property settlement issues, the way in which de facto relationships are treated with regard to maintenance is identical to the way in which married couples are treated. There are provisions in the Family Law Act that discuss the right to maintenance, power to order maintenance, factors to look at, urgent maintenance, and modification of orders that are almost verbatim for both married and de facto couples. You can find an analysis of all of the rules regarding maintenance in our maintenance center.
De Facto Relationships and Financial Agreements
As you may have guessed, the provisions of the Family Law Act that discuss financial arrangements for married couples is largely the same as the provisions that apply to de facto couples. Parties to a de facto relationship are permitted to enter into financial agreements; the only major distinction being that the agreement will be no longer be binding if a de facto couple later marries. Again, for a more detailed look at the law surrounding financial agreements, please see our property center.
De Facto Relationships and Superannuation
Superannuation splitting is available to de facto couples to the same extent that it is available to married couples. The only noteworthy distinction is that there are more complex provisions regarding the separation declaration for de facto couples than there are for married couples.
As you can see, thanks to the 2008 amendment, if you are involved in a legally recognised de facto relationship, and you subsequently separate, you are entitled to nearly the same relief you would be entitled to had you and your partner married.
A de facto relationship exists where two people, who are neither married nor related to each other, live together on a genuine domestic basis and includes same-sex relationships.
In determining whether a de facto relationship truly exists, the court will consider several factors, including but not limited to: the duration of the relationship, whether a sexual relationship exists, the degree of financial support, and your reputation and public aspects of your relationship. If you have engaged in a de facto relationship for at least two years, you are entitled to similar relief upon separation that you would be entitled to if you had chosen to marry.
In 2008 major changes were made with regard to the way the law treats de facto couples that subsequently separate. Now, de facto relationships fall under the purview of the federal law and are discussed in The Family Law Act of 1975. The 2008 amendment basically allowed for de facto couples to be entitled to nearly identical relief as married couples in terms of property settlement, maintenance, and financial agreements.
The bottom line is that the law awards some protection for de facto couples even though you and your partner chose not to get married. If you were party to a de facto relationship and have since separated, be sure to contact your lawyer and learn about the types of relief that are available to you.
By its very nature, separation and divorce is difficult, emotionally draining, and have a major impact on your life. However, if you have children, this emotional toll is only amplified. Your children may experience a lot of pain as you and your spouse or partner separate and they adjust to a new lifestyle of splitting their time with you and sleeping in two different homes. Because divorce is so hard for children to cope with, the Australian legislature has placed an emphasis on shared parenting and ensuring that both parents continue to play an active role in the lives of their children after separation.
2006 Changes
The largest contributor to this concept of shared parental responsibility came in 2006 in the form of an amendment to the Family Law Act 1975. When passed, this amendment brought about the most significant change to family law in more than thirty years. The main objective of the amendment was to both support and promote the practice of shared parenting and urge parents to reach an agreement with regard to parenting arrangements on their own, without the interference of the courts.
An explanatory memorandum that accompanied the amendment further expressed that the changes were intended to “represent a generational change in family law and aim to bring about a cultural shift in how family separation is managed: away from litigation and towards co-operative parenting.” Through this amendment, Australia took a significant step towards making divorce easier on children.
Not only did the amendment express a desire for parents to reach an agreement on their own, but it also stressed the importance of both parents continuing to take an active role in the parenting of the child. The amendment expresses a desire for parents to jointly share duties and responsibilities, and also for children to be cared for and spend time with both parents.
While this article is designed to give you an in-depth look at how parenting arrangements work, through litigation or otherwise, bear in mind that often the most ideal way to settle a difference is to reach an agreement without involving the court. Children benefit from having both parents involved in their lives, so the best thing you can do for your child is to reach an agreement where each parent has meaningful involvement, and refrain from having your parenting issues heard in court.
Shared Parental Responsibility
The term “parental responsibility” is defined in the Family Law Act as: “all the duties, powers, responsibilities and authority which, by law, parents have in relation to children.” This has been understood to mean that parental responsibility encompasses living arrangements, medical treatment, education, religious upbringing, protection from harm, and the responsibility to keep the child safe among other things.
You may be wondering, what exactly did the legislature mean when it expressed a preference for shared parental responsibility? Does that mean the child should spend equal time with each parent? Should each parent spend equal money on the child? Should each be allowed to make decisions about the child’s religion, schooling, and extra-curricular activities? Generally speaking, the answer is yes.
Australia’s preference for shared parental responsibility means that both parents should have involvement in the child’s life, make decisions with regard to the child’s upbringing, and contribute to the general welfare and needs of the child. The courts will not allocate or assign responsibilities unless disputes arise that the parents are unable to resolve. Furthermore, should a court order be silent with regard to parental responsibility, both parents are to retain the responsibility.
As you can see, Australia has a strong preference for parents to share in the upbringing of the child, despite separation or divorce, and the courts are reluctant to make decisions regarding specific parental responsibilities. The Amendment discussed above in fact created a rebuttable presumption that it is in the best interest of the child to have both parents share equally in their responsibility, care, and upbringing.
It should not come as a surprise that very rarely do the courts take action to limit the parental responsibility of a parent, it takes extreme circumstances affecting the welfare of the child for the court to intervene and do such. Specifically, the rebuttable presumption discussed above is only abandoned where there is a threat of abuse, violence, or if allowing the parent to have control over the child is contrary to the child’s best interests.
Equal Time
Sometimes the concept of shared parental responsibility can be difficult when it comes to how much time the child spends with each parent. Equal time is often harder to organize than equal responsibility with regard to general decision-making, education, and religion. Allowing each parent to have equal time can raise logistical issues, which the court has addressed.
While there is a rebuttable presumption that equal shared parental responsibility is in the best interest of the child, there is no presumption with regard to the amount of time each parent has with the child. Before the court will issue an order allowing for equal time to be shared by the parents, it must first determine that such an arrangement is in the child’s best interest and reasonably practical.
There are advantages and disadvantages to allowing your child to spend equal time with you and your former spouse or partner. Each child is different and will respond differently to a divorce, and should you need a court order determining custody, the court will consider both the child’s interests as well as whether splitting time equally is reasonably practical. When determining whether equal time is reasonably practical the court will consider the following factors:
how far apart the parents live to form each other
the parent’s current and future capacity to implement an arrangement for the child to spend equal time, or substantial and significant time, with each of the parents
the parent’s current and future capacity to communicate with each other and resolve difficulties that might arise in implementing an arrangement of that kind
the impact that an arrangement of that kind would have on the child
such other matters as the court consider relevant
As you may have guessed, courts rarely grant parenting orders allowing for equal time. While the best interest of the child is paramount to the court’s decision, it also considers the practicability of the order, and more often than not equal time is not found to be reasonably practicable.
Day-to-Day Decisions
Generally speaking, the parent who has the child in their care is responsible for the day-to-day decisions – like what the child eats, wears, when the child goes to bed, and what activities the child does. These day-to-day decisions can be made unilaterally, without consulting the other parent. However, the big decisions, otherwise known as “major long-term issues” are to be decided by both parents. The Family Law Act has enumerated certain issues that fall into the major long-term category, they include but are not limited to: education, religion/cultural upbringing, health, name, and living arrangements.
What happens first?
We have discussed how Australia’s preference for shared parental responsibility and for settling matters without litigation, so you may be wondering how the process works, and what happens first? This article will discuss the non-litigious ways to reach an agreement before discussing how parenting litigation works.
Step one to reaching a parenting agreement is to participate in something called family dispute resolution (otherwise known as alternative dispute resolution). All courts require compliance with primary dispute resolution, and you must obtain a certificate from a family dispute resolution practitioner prior to filing for a parenting order. The purpose of required family dispute resolution is to encourage early and full disclosure of relevant information, and allow parties to engage in a process that not only avoids legal action but also minimizes cost.
While participating in family dispute resolution, the focus of the parties is to be upon the best interest of the child, and parties should be open to negotiation, arbitration, and counseling.
Unless you can show good reason for not having followed the family dispute resolution requirement, non-compliance can result in serious cost consequences. There are only several exceptions to this requirement that excuse you from having to file a certificate from a family dispute resolution practitioner. The major exception is where the court finds that there has been or is a risk of abuse or family violence of the child. While there are several other exceptions, keep in mind that should you fail to comply with this requirement, it could cost you.
Family Relationship Centers and Family Advice Line
As part of the push to get families to reach agreements with regard to parenting issues without resorting to litigation, the government introduced both Family Relationship Centers and a Family Relationship Advice Line. Both programs are government sanctioned and designed to encourage parties to resolve disputes and enter into parenting plans.
The purpose of the Family Relationship Centers (FRCs) is to allow parents to reach workable arrangements for their children with the help of FRC staff. The staff members are not only trained in how to give advice concerning disputes but also are trained in identifying issues of family violence and abuse. Furthermore, while the staff does not administer legal advice, it has the ability to place parties in communication with Legal Aid and private practitioners to obtain the legal advice they need.
The Family Advice Line is available from 8 am to 8 pm Monday through Friday, 10 am to 4 pm on Saturdays and can be reached at 1800 050 321. Not only is this service available to the parents, but also is available for grandparents, stepparents, children and friends.
The purpose of the Family Advice Line is to provide information about the family law system, separation, how to maintain relationships, and the impact of conflict on children among other things. This service is free, and may remain anonymous should you choose to keep your identity unknown.
Other Methods of Dispute Resolution
Mediation is another type of dispute resolution that doesn’t involve the courts. The benefits to choosing mediation are that it can be less expensive than litigation, your case can be heard sooner than it could in Family Court, and the parties have greater control over the process.
Collaborative law is another option for dispute resolution and allows for parties and lawyers to meet in four-way meetings. This allows the parties to stay directly involved in the communication and negotiations. A major distinction with collaborative law is that the parties and lawyers agree in advance not to go to court.
Parenting Orders
After you have attended mandatory family dispute resolution and come to an agreement, you may apply to the court for a parenting order. Any person concerned with the child’s welfare may submit an application for a parenting order however in most cases, it is a parent, the child, or a grandparent who is seeking such an order.
With regard to parenting orders, the emphasis is on the best interest of the child. The court considers this to be the “paramount principle.” The primary considerations viewed by the court are allowing the child to have a meaningful relationship with both parents and also to protect the child from violence, abuse, and/or neglect. The court will also give consideration to a myriad of other factors, including the events that have occurred since separation.
After considering all relevant factors, the court can issue a parenting order that discusses parental responsibility, with whom the child will live, how much time the child spends with each parent, and how much communication the child has with each parent.
If you would like to modify a parenting order after it has been issued, you should first seek the assistance of a lawyer. Only if you are still unable to reach an agreement should you apply to the court for further help. At this point, the court can order both parents to attend a parenting program, or it can consider varying the order.
Non-Compliance and Parenting Orders
You should avoid breaching a parenting order at all costs; the court takes breaches of its orders very seriously and you could even potentially face goal time upon breach.
Australia has adopted a three-stage approach designed to both educate parents as well as impose sanctions when noncompliance occurs. Stage one addresses educating the parents about the nature and effect of parenting orders. Stage two is invoked upon the first breach of a parenting order, and requires the breaching party to attend an approved parenting course. When there are subsequent breaches, stage three permits the court to impose serious sanctions such as fines or imprisonment.
Parenting Plan
A parenting plan is a written document discussing any agreements reached between parties with regard to matters affecting their children. They differ from parenting orders in that they do not require the court’s involvement; they are simply informal agreements reached by the parties.
A parenting plan should detail the responsibilities and rights of both parents and its aim should be to create an arrangement in the best interest of the child. A parenting plan should include a breakdown of time that each parent is to spend with the child, discuss where the child will spend holidays, payments for the child’s expenses, and any other aspect of the care, welfare or development of the child.
The court will refuse to grant a divorce order unless it is satisfied that proper parenting arrangements are in place, and if the parties are unable to provide a plan the court will do it for them.
While it is permissible (and usually recommended) that parents agree to a parenting plan on their own, should this not be an option in your situation then you can resort to the other methods of dispute resolution we have discussed.
It is possible to have both a valid parenting plan and a valid parenting order. Typically, this situation arises when the order discusses significant topics (such as where the child will live) while the parenting plan manages the more intricate issues (for instance, how the child should be disciplined).
A major distinction between a parenting plan and a parenting order is that a parenting plan is not enforceable; it cannot be registered by the court and parties in breach of a parenting plan are not subject to the same sanctions as parties breaching a parenting order. For further discussion addressing the differences between a parenting plan and a parenting order, please see our FAQ that tackles this issue.
Independent Children’s Lawyer
In some cases, it is necessary to appoint an independent child’s lawyer (ICL) to represent the child’s interest. Parties can request this, or the court may appoint an ICL on its own initiative. In determining whether this appointment is necessary the court will consider a myriad of factors, including but not limited to: allegations of child abuse, a conflict between parties, issues of cultural or religious differences, sexual preferences of the parties, mental illness, and the proposed separation of siblings.
The role of the ICL is not to be the child’s legal representative, but rather to act as an “honest broker” throughout the legal proceedings. An ICL is charged with the task of forming an independent view of the evidence and acting in the best interest of the child. The presence of an ICL should minimize the trauma to the child and facilitate an agreed resolution of matters in the best interest of the child.
Any information that a child shares with an ICL is deemed to be confidential unless the ICL considers disclosure to be in the best interest of the child.
What the Child Wants
Undoubtedly a child will form an opinion about where they want to live and whom they want to live with throughout your separation and divorce. A frequent question that arises is whether the child’s wishes are considered when determining custody arrangements.
A child is not required to disclose their wishes, however the court is required to consider their views should they choose to express them. The court will balance the child’s view with their age and degree of maturity before determining how much credibility to give the child.
Court Proceedings
It is clear that the preference in Australia is for parties to reach agreements with regard to parenting and custody issues without involving the court. However, this is not ideal in every situation. Some separations and divorces are particularly contentious, some involve issues of violence, and other times the parties simply can’t reach an agreement using dispute resolution. Should that happen, there are certain rules in place to protect children if their parents end up litigating child-related issues
The court takes on several principle roles when it comes to child-related proceedings. First, during the proceedings, the court is to consider both the needs of the child and the impact that the proceedings may have on the child. Essentially, the court’s role is to minimize any trauma experienced by the child throughout the proceedings. The court is charged with actively directing, controlling and managing the conduct of the proceedings. Additionally, the court is to conduct proceedings in a manner that will protect the child from violence or abuse, promote cooperative child-focused parenting, and reduce delays, formality, and legal technicality.
Additionally, there are certain logistical things the court can do to help protect the child. For instance, the court is required to address as many irrelevant issues as possible on one occasion, which shortens the overall proceedings and lessens the impact on the child. Also, the court may schedule hearing dates close to each other so that the child will not be impacted by lengthy times between hearing dates. The court can also limit the number of witnesses used, and the technology used, and again, encourage the parties to use dispute resolution services.
Another question that often arises when parties must litigate matters concerns the evidence that may be shown. The most common types of evidence are as follows:
application and affidavit of the parties
expert affidavit
oral evidence (testimony)
testimony/reports from an independent children’s lawyer
family consultant’s report
While litigation is certainly an option for parties dealing with custody issues, it is clear that the preference is for parents to reach an amicable agreement by way of a parenting agreement or a parenting order achieved through dispute resolution.
In custody disputes, one of the issues parents often disagree over is which parent will decide the major long-term issues; such as where the child will attend school, what the child will be named, and the religion and cultural upbringing the child will experience. Generally speaking, the parent who physically has the child in their custody will decide the day-to-day decisions, but what about these bigger and more impactful decisions?
What is a major long-term issue?
First, we should take a look at what exactly constitutes a major long-term issue. The Family Law Act defines that these issues are those about the long-term care, welfare and development of the child and includes (but is not limited to) issues of that nature about:
education (both current and future);
religious and cultural upbringing;
health
the child’s name and
changes to the child’s living arrangements that make it significantly more difficult for the child to spend time with a parent
Some issues might not be major long-term issues on their face, but the results of the decision impact the child and thus make it a major long-term issue. An example of this is would be when a parent starts a new relationship. This by itself would not be considered a major long-term issue, however if it results in the parent moving further away from the child it becomes one.
Generally, decisions about what the child wears, what time the child goes to bed, and what the child eats are not considered major long-term decisions. These decisions are typically made by whichever parent has the child in their custody. For instance, the father may decide while the child is in his care he will go to bed at 8:00, and the mother may decide that 7:30 is an appropriate bedtime. These decisions do not impact the long-term welfare of the child and are not typically disputed.
However, sometimes an issue that appears to be a day-to-day decision is actually a major long-term decision. This may be the case where the parents have differing views about the religious or cultural upbringing of the child. One parent may not want the child to eat certain foods or receive certain medical treatment because of religious practice, while the other parent may not follow the same practice. In this situation, the decision about what food the child will eat has become a major long-term decision and will be treated as such by the court.
Who makes the major long-term decisions?
If you have read our other articles about custody, you have noticed a trend. The law in Australia strongly prefers for parents to reach amicable decisions regarding custody without using the courts, and also for parents to share parental responsibility for the child. So, it may not come as a surprise that when it comes to making major long-term decisions, the decisions should be made jointly. This isn’t merely a preference; the Family Law Act actually imposes an obligation on parents to make a genuine attempt to reach a joint decision. Only if you are unable to do so, after attending dispute resolution, may you apply to the court for an order addressing the conflict.
Rules about specific major long-term issues
Changing the child’s name. If you wish to change your child’s name, each person with parental responsibility for the child will have to agree. If you are unable to get the other parent on board with the proposed name change, you may make an application to the court, and the court will make the decision while considering the welfare of the child. In determining if the proposed name change should be made, the court will look at several factors, including both the short and long-term effects, embarrassment expected on behalf of the child, identity confusion of the child, and the effect the change will have on the relationship between the child and other parents. Before you may apply to the court for a name change, however, the Family Law Act requires the parties to attend dispute resolution in an attempt to resolve the issue.
Relocation. Relocation is one of the most common major long-term issues that parents tend to disagree over. After enduring a separation or divorce it is not unusual for one parent to want to relocate. The parent may wish to relocate because of an employment opportunity, because of a new relationship, to be closer to family, or simply to make a fresh start. However, if the parent wishes to relocate the child as well, often the non-moving party will object. This is obviously a difficult subject and one that is emotional for all parties, including the child. Unfortunately, there is no guiding provision in the Family Law Act and no case that carves out a definitive rule regarding this issue. The courts have consistently determined that the same guiding principle applies to relocation cases as to other major long-term causes, and that principle is to make a decision that is in the best interest of the child.
When it comes to settling disputes about major long-term issues, each situation is different and has its own unique circumstances. It is always best to try and reach an agreement without involving the courts, however if this is impossible, you may apply to the court for an order resolving the dispute. The court will always act under the principle that the best interest of the child is of paramount importance, and this is the same guiding force you should adopt in your attempt at reaching an agreement.
Australia has come a long way when it comes to child support enforcement. In 1988, less than 30% of child maintenance was paid, and in response, Australia passed the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act. This required child support obligations to be registered, and thus become a debt to the Commonwealth. Prior to making this change, child support collection was a major issue for many Australians.
The legislation was passed in hopes of ensuring that children receive child support on a regular and timely basis. Fortunately, since the Act was passed non-payment issues have decreased significantly.
Registration
Child support, child maintenance, and spousal maintenance may all be registered for collection. Once registered, and the details entered into the child support register, the Child Support Agency (CSA) may enforce payment. When payment is not timely, the CSA reserves the right to impose penalties, which are retained by the CSA and not given to the payee.
This registration process is how the liability becomes a debt to the Commonwealth, and thus enforceable by the CSA. The CSA can enforce child support using the traditional court enforcement process.
Enforcement
A payee may enforce child support payments even if the debt has been registered for collection. As long as the payee notifies the Registrar in writing, 14 days before instituting the proceeding, the payee may sue and recover the debt due. A shorter notice period may be appropriate if there are exceptional circumstances.
Alternatively, the CSA may use the Federal Magistrates Court to enforce child support payments. Under these proceedings the court is not permitted to vary the child support liability or remit any penalties, the proceedings are strictly intended to be enforcement summons. The court is charged with the task of making an inquiry into the financial circumstances of the payer, and subsequently assessing his or her ability to pay the arrears.
Once the debt has been proved, the court may enforce the payment through a variety of methods, including garnishment, seizure of property, sequestration of the estate, sale of an interest in real property, or any other method necessary.
Collection Methods
The CSA has several methods it may use to enforce the collection of child support payments. They are as follows.
Auto-withholding. Under this method, payments owed are deducted from the payer’s salary directly by the employer. Payers of child support may be averse to this sort of collection, as they would rather not share their child support liability with their employer, however it is considered an offense for an employer to discriminate based on such.
Attachment of debts. The CSA has the authority to attach debts owed to the payer, including a tax refund. They may do this after first issuing a notice to the debtor (one owing to the payer money).
Departure prohibition orders. Such orders prevent payers owing money from leaving the country.
In sum, there are several ways in which you can ensure any child support obligation due to your child will be paid. Thanks to the legislation passed in 1988, non-payment issues have been on the decline as it provides easy and effective ways to enforce and collect payments owed.
The issue of paternity can sometimes present problems for a party who is seeking child support from someone who is claiming not to be the father of the child. While the court does not have the power to order paternity testing simply to satisfy doubts of a parent, the court may order such testing where the parentage of a child has been at issue in proceedings. There must be some evidence that places the issue of paternity in question before the court will order testing.
If paternity is disputed in your case, you may make an application directly to the court seeking a declaration. If the parties have not agreed to parentage testing, the court will order the parties to do so in order to resolve the issue and make a declaration.
Once paternity has been determined, either through parentage testing or by the court’s determination, the court may make a declaration of parentage that is considered conclusive and binding for all future hearings. Additionally, upon establishing parentage, a party may seek child support through the regular process.
Impact on Child Support
Paternity tends to be at issue in child support disputes more than any other area in family law. The reason for this is that the Family Law Act provides that only a “parent” may be liable to pay child support. It may come as a surprise, but determining if someone is a “parent” by definition is often difficult. Recent cases have addressed the complexity of determining parentage in same-sex couples, as well as couples who use artificial conception.
Unfortunately, because only a parent is liable for child support, it is not uncommon for an alleged father to dispute paternity in hopes of avoiding this liability. The Family Law Act has provided a list of circumstances in which paternity can be assumed, however, the challenging party may still dispute the assumption.
Paternity is to be assumed by the Child Support Agency where the birth certificate names the father if the child was born during a marriage, the person’s name is found in a register of births, a court has found that the person is the parent, the person has executed an instrument acknowledging parentage, or the child has been adopted by the person.
Who can be ordered to undergo testing?
Anyone who is at least eighteen years old may be asked to undergo parentage testing, regardless of whether they are a party to the proceedings. The court is granted broad discretion in this area and may order anyone whom it believes could aid in determining the parentage of the child to undergo testing.
Should the party asked to take a paternity test to be less than eighteen years old, his parent or guardian will have to provide consent. If the parent or guardian fails to provide consent, this action alone could have an impact on the case. In a situation where the parent or guardian refuses to consent to the testing, the court is permitted to draw conclusions as it sees fit. Refusal, however, is not automatic grounds for the court to conclude paternity; the court is still required to consider the circumstances for the refusal, such as religious or cultural reasons.
Methods of Testing
There are several ways to test parentage. Provisions in the Family Law Act discuss in detail the procedures to be followed in prescribing a parentage test; the methods range from blood group testing to genetic fingerprinting. The court is given discretion with regard to this testing and may impose any terms or conditions it sees fit, including requiring a person to submit to a medical procedure, provide a bodily sample, or disclose a medical or family history.
DNA testing formerly required a blood sample, however now the kit can be completed by using a swab from the inside of the cheek. DNA testing is both painless and accurate, typically showing a probability of parentage of at least 95%.
An accredited laboratory must carry out the test, and a list of those laboratories can be found at www.nata.asn.au.
Non-Paternity: Recovering Child Support
The Family Law Act permits the court to make just and equitable orders if child support applicationshave been paid by a person declared not to be the father. The court will consider a myriad of factors, including whether either party knew or should have known that the payer was not the parent, the relationship between the payer and the child, and the financial circumstances of both the payee and payer among other factors.
When a couple separates or divorces, or a de facto relationship[i] ends, a property must be divided. The property includes all of the assets – houses, cars, jewelry, furniture – and all of the liabilities, like loans and mortgages. Superannuation – the money individuals set aside to have when they retire – is now also included in those assets that need to be divided fairly between a couple, whether married, de facto heterosexual or de facto same sex. In the past, superannuation was considered a financial resource, similar to salary or other income. Today, however, most couples weigh superannuation funds as if they are marital assets or property.
Part VIIIB of the Family Law Act, 1975 (FLA) covers issues dealing with superannuation and families. The law requires that the superannuation benefits due to one spouse or de facto partner must be divided with the other spouse or partner. But there are several difficulties with dividing superannuation. Firstly, if a couple divorces before retirement, the superannuation funds are not yet available. So while a couple may divide up their property at the age of 45, they may not see funds from superannuation for another 20 or 30 years. Other problems…..
The law recognizes these problems and offers three ways a divorcing couple can divide superannuation interests.
“Split”. The first method is to split the interest into two accounts or benefits. This can be done either by a payment split when the superannuation becomes due (say, at retirement) or through an interesting split, which means each partner receives a superannuation interest. With an interesting split, the partner receiving the new benefit can keep the money in the original account until it comes due, or open an entirely new account. Nobody receives an actual cash payment – the money remains in a superannuation fund. Tax issues must be calculated before the payment or interest is split.
“Flag”. The second approach to dividing superannuation is to flag the benefit for a later date. In this scenario, the couple marks the benefit and the trustee of the superannuation fund is not allowed to touch it until the “flag” is lifted, either by agreement of the parties or with a court order. The couple can then decide what happens to the fund only later after the person who owns the superannuation account retires.
Leave it alone. In this case, couples consider superannuation a financial resource. When dividing up their assets, superannuation is only included in the calculation as a source of income, not as an asset.
Splitting the Superannuation Now
Typically, divorcing couples split their superannuation. Most couples choose this approach because it enables them to know exactly how much money they are receiving and allows them to make a clean break, without having to return to financial issues ten, twenty or thirty years later.
There are several steps needed to split the superannuation:
Step 1: Request information from the partner’s superannuation fund.
There are two forms that a spouse must submit to the trustee of the superannuation fund:
Form 6 Declaration, which proves to the trustee that you are entitled to see the information and
the Superannuation Information Request Form. These forms can be obtained online
You must be “eligible” to receive the information from the fund. An eligible person is:
The member of the fund or
The spouse of the member of the fund or
If (1) or (2) died, the deceased person’s legal representative or
Someone who plans to enter into a superannuation agreement with the member
Step 2: Evaluating information from the superannuation fund.
The law requires the fund to provide information to the member of the fund and his or her spouse. The fund may provide information regarding the value of the superannuation or information that helps the person requesting information determine the value of the fund. The trustee should also notify the requester whether or not the fund may be split. Once this information is obtained, the numbers must be calculated using specific formulas, depending on the type of fund. An expert in family law or accounting can help determine the correct formula to use in order to obtain the correct amount of interest each party is entitled to from the superannuation.
Step 3: Turn to the courts for an order.
Couples may sign their own splitting agreement and take it directly to the trustee of the superannuation fund. Alternatively, couples can turn to the courts with their own financial agreement already signed. Finally, if a couple can’t agree, they may obtain a court order.
If both sides agree about the value of the fund and it’s division, they can submit an Application for Consent Orders, which includes their agreement regarding superannuation. This agreement is binding only if both parties signed it AND both received independent legal advice. This is the case regarding all financial agreements between couples divorcing.
De facto couples terminating their relationship may also submit a financial agreement regarding superannuation, but only if they were residents of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, the Australian Capital Territory, the Northern Territory or Norfolk Island when the agreement was made.
If the parties cannot come to their own agreement, they may turn to the court for Orders.
In either case, the trustee of the fund must be notified that the court is being asked to give orders. This is to ensure that the request being made complies with the fund’s rules. Also, the trustee is entitled to attend the court hearing and oppose the orders.
Step 4: Send a copy of the agreement or court order to the superfund trustee.
Once the court gives orders, the superannuation fund must be sent a sealed copy of the decision.
Step 5: Split the superannuation benefit.
Generally, the superannuation benefit will be split into two funds, one for each partner. There may be administrative costs for splitting the fund.
Contact Mathews Family Law to speak with one of our specialist solicitors and family law property lawyers to discuss your superannuation split today. Call our office on 03 9804 7991 and book a consultation with a divorce and family law attorney.
[i] Laws on the splitting of superannuation do not apply to de facto couples from Western Australia.
When a couple divorces (or de facto or same-sex couples terminate their relationship), one of the major decisions to make is “who gets what”. A pre-nuptial agreement (often called a ‘pre-nup’) may help make this division easier. If a couple can decide between them and come up with their own agreement, long court battles can be avoided. If not, the courts have their own way of dealing with property division. In Australia, the courts place all property into one pool and then divide it “equitably” or fairly. Everything is included and considered joint property by the courts.
The law governing property division(link to “Property Division FAQs”) between spouses or de facto couples is Part VIII of the Family Law Act, 1975 (FLA). The law provides guidelines for the courts to use when dividing property. There are a number of factors the court will consider and which couples should know about. Below is a list of some considerations.
Think about the children
Before even entering into the fight, divorcing couples should consider their children when dividing up property. It might be more “fair” to sell the marital home, but parents (if they can afford to) should also consider the impact of this change on the children. If parents are going to share parenting time, they should think about what children will need in each home and also divide accordingly. If one parent is moving to a smaller home, he or she might not have space for so much furniture, so why demand it just for the sake of being fair. Both parents should consider the physical and emotional needs of their children, not just what they themselves believe they are entitled to receive.
Depreciation of ownership rights
Over time, the contribution of the person who brought the property decreases and the contribution of the other partner increases. For example, one person may have purchased the house prior to the marriage, but the other partner paid most of the mortgage on it for the next 20 years. The investment in the house may be equal by the time the couple splits up and the court will consider this relevant in making an equitable distribution.
The value of the property when it was acquired.
The courts will consider the value of the property when it was brought into the marriage as well as the length of the marriage. There is a difference between a house that was worth $100,000 and one worth $2 million. If a couple was married for only a short period and during that time the marital home tripled in value, how much is the spouse who purchased it prior to the marriage entitled to? How much is the other spouse, who paid next to nothing in terms of mortgage and maintenance, entitled to?
Non-financial contribution
The courts in Australia today recognize that in many marriages today, one partner may earn a high salary while the other contributes to the marriage in a non-financial capacity. This role has a value that also needs to be measured for property purposes. Many couples decide that one partner will stay home to care for the house and children. This enables the other partner to obtain an education, gain professional experience and earn a higher wage. The stay-at-home parent is entitled to financial compensation for his or her job at home and for allowing the other spouse professional development.
The parent who stays at home makes other large non-financial contributions to the home. By being at home, the family saves thousands of dollars on child care and possibly cleaners and cooks. Finally, the at-home spouse may undertake do-it-yourself jobs, like painting, also worth a good deal of money to the family, but without any actual monetary compensation. Imagine a spouse who repaints the inside of the house. Not only has the family saved on the expense of paying an outside contractor but the value of the home has also increased.
Use and maintenance of the property
The court will consider not only the worth of the couple’s property but also how it is used. In one family, for example, the father stays home to care for the children. He is responsible for all household work – cooking, cleaning, gardening, and paying bills. The mother, in turn, works long hours to provide a good income and financial stability. No doubt the mother “earned” her share of the house, but so did the father. The court might ask who actually needs the home more. In this case, the court may consider equitable distribution to mean that the father keeps the house and the mother receives other property.
Future needs
Section 75(2) of the FLA lays out the factors a court uses to determine the “future needs” of each spouse. The court considers age, health, professional training and ability and property and financial resources, among other factors. Based on this analysis, the court may decide that a particular spouse is entitled to more of the marital property, to compensate for that person’s weaker ability to earn a living.
Family law property matters are complex, and can benefit from the guidance of specialist family law attorneys. Contact Mathews Family Law to discuss your family law property settlement today.
No two families alike, especially no two divorcing families. So parenting plans will differ, depending on the size of the family, religious affiliation, professional status of parents, income, educational needs and location, just to name a few. The first step to creating the plan is simply sitting down together and talking. If parents were unable to open the lines of communication during marriage, this might be an even harder task now. But both sides must remember that the children’s needs and best interests are the priority and they come first in the parenting plan. With that in mind, below are some essential issues that every plan should have, along with some extra ideas that families might want to consider for their plan.
A schedule for the children
This is a schedule for the children for school vacations, national and religious holidays and day-to-day living. In the ideal, it looks towards the future, so schedules can be created on a yearly basis, with holidays and visitation days switching each year (ie Mom has the children for Christmas in odd years and Dad has them for summer holidays in even years).
Decision Making
A good plan should determine the authority and responsibilities of each parent. The parenting plan should determine who makes which decisions. Some parents decide that when the children are with a parent, that parent makes day to day decisions. For young children, this might include what they eat, how often they bathe, how homework is done and when they go to sleep. For older children decision-making will involve issues of computer and cell phone use, dating, curfews, car use and more.
The plan should also consider long-term, “bigger” decisions and give authority to either one or both parents on matters like education, health, extracurricular activities and religious upbringing. The parents might agree that regardless of how decision-making is divided up, either parent is allowed to make emergency decisions regarding the children’s health or safety.
Taking care of the children
The parenting plan should take into account specific parenting responsibilities. Sometimes issues come up because both parents want to be involved (for example, meeting the child’s teacher) and sometimes neither parent is able to take responsibility (for example, who stays home when a child is sick). What about medical and dental appointments, or transporting the children between homes? Whether there is one child or four, these questions come up regularly. Some plans state that the parent in charge that day is responsible for these tasks. Other plans use the “divide and conquer” method, giving dad all medical and dental tasks, say, while mom deals with all educational responsibilities.
A Method for Communicating and Sharing Information
Despite all the effort, parents will need to communicate with each other and share information. Online calendars and schedules that can be shared and updated are a great method for keeping each other informed of changes. Emailing and text messages enable fast communication when a quick decision needs to be made. The plan should detail the method or methods chosen and the expectation that parents will make every effort to keep each other in the loop.
Financial Responsibility
Laying out the financial commitments and rights of each parent is an important part of the plan. If one parent is paying child support, the plan should explain what this includes. The plan should also determine who covers additional expenses for the children like summer camp, public transportation, special activities and pocket money. Are both parents paying into a college or savings fund for each child? How much should each parent put aside? Every family is different so parents should sit down and work through as many of the expenses they currently have or foresee having in the future.
A Way to Manage Disagreements
No plan is perfect and sometimes disagreements arise. Parents need to have a method in place for working through these disagreements. The plan can require parents to first try working it out on their own or turning to mediation. When parents can’t resolve their differences, arbitration may be required. These are preferred alternatives to court because they allow each parent to be heard and help the parents hand-craft a solution that satisfies everyone. Generally, court should be the last resort.
Evaluating and Changing the Plan
Parents and children change over time. Sometimes it will be necessary to make changes to the parenting plan. What happens when one parent needs to relocate? What happens when the children get a bit older and want to make changes to the plan? The plan should have a system for dealing with the changing needs of the family members. Some plans require an evaluation every year. Others might require a family discussion to get input from everyone involved. Whatever the approach, it should be described in the parenting plan and followed. The new plan can also be submitted to the court for orders.
An experienced family lawyer can help families create a plan that’s appropriate for them. Below are some suggested templates for a parenting plan. Contact Mathews Family Law today to discuss your parenting plan with a specialist family law lawyer.
The Family Act 1975 ensures that children maintain their relationships with both parents and guarantees both parents the right to spend time with their children, all in the best interests of the children. One of the major objectives of the Act is to ensure that “children have the benefit of both of their parents having a meaningful involvement in their lives, to the maximum extent consistent with the best interests of the child”.
Today there is an assumption of shared parental responsibility between parents for their children. This responsibility includes all of the “duties, powers, responsibilities and authority” which parents have by law regarding their children. Section 61DA states that when a court makes a parenting order, it “must apply a presumption that it is in the best interests of the child for the child’s parents to have equal shared parental responsibility for the child”. While the child may live primarily with one parent, both parents have a role in his or her ongoing, daily life.
“Equal” time v. “substantial and significant” time
If parents have shared responsibility for their children, they should also have shared time with their children. But how much time is the right amount? How much is fair to each parent? And what is reasonable to expect from the parents and from the children?
The law requires the court to first consider providing “equal” time to each parent. A schedule with equal time might involve children living with the mother one week, then the father the next week. In some families, the children may spend Sunday through Wednesday at their father’s home and Wednesday night through Sunday morning with their mother. The court weighs two factors in order to determine if the child should have equal time with each parent. The court must ask if spending time with each parent is in the child’s best interests and is “reasonably practicable“? A court might very well determine that it’s best for the child to have equal shared time with each parent but since they live 300 miles away from each other, this is not feasible. Only if both of the above criteria are met can a court consider giving a parenting order that grants equal time with the children.
If there is (or will be) a court order giving shared responsibility to both parents, but the court does not grant an order for equal time, the court can consider giving an order for “substantial and significant” time. Again, the considerations for giving this type of order are whether this is in the best interests of the child and whether it’s practical.
If there is a conflict between what is good for the child and what is fair to the parents, the child’s welfare comes first.
What is “reasonably practicable”?
The court will weigh a number of issues to decide if it is practical for the parents to have equal time or substantial time with the children. These include:
The distance between the two homes. If one parent lives in Perth and the other in Sydney, equal time will be difficult to establish.
The parents’ present and future ability to work out an arrangement for the children to spend equal or substantial time with each parent. For example, in a case in the United States
What is “substantial and significant time”?
The law also clearly delineates what substantial and significant time is, making it clear to the courts what the parenting services order should include and letting parents know ahead of time what is to be expected. Significant time goes beyond a nice weekend together once a month, or dinner every Wednesday night. Parents who are given substantial and significant are expected to:
spend time with their children on days that fall on weekends and holidays as well as regular weekdays;
be involved with the children’s daily routine;
be present at occasions and events that are significant to the children (school graduation, a visiting day at camp or school, dance recitals, end-of-year sports games, etc.).
Similarly, the parent needs to include the children in events and occasions he or she considers significant (special events at work, promotions, birthdays).
The court can also consider many other factors in determining if the children are spending substantial and significant time with the non-custodial parent.
See the child custody blog for recent cases and legislative changes on issues of parenting and shared time.
Accredited Family Law Specialist, FDRP,
Mediator and Parenting Coordinator
Vanessa Mathews is the founder and managing director of Mathews Family Law & Mediation Specialists, and has the rare combination of social work qualifications and experience, combined with nearly 20 years’ experience as a lawyer and mediator; it makes her approach to resolving legal relationship issues both sensible and sensitive.
She is a fully accredited family law specialist, mediator, family dispute resolution practitioner and parenting coordinator with a commerce degree – adding a financially astute aspect to her practice.
Vanessa has extensive experience in complex issues that arise from relationship breakdown, and works in partnership with her clients, who regularly describe her as empathetic
Vanessa is an active member of the family law profession and a member of the:
Law Institute of Victoria, Family Law Section
Law Council of Australia, Family Law Section
Resolution Institute
Australian Institute of Family Law Arbitrators and Mediators
National Mediation Accreditation System
Relationships Australia Family Lawyers Panel
Fellow of the International Academy of Family Lawyers
Relationships Australia / Federal Circuit Court ‘Access Resolve’ Mediation Service
Relationships Australia ‘Property Mediation’ Service
Vanessa and Mathews Family Law & Mediation Specialists are regularly recognised as a ‘Leading Victorian Family Lawyer’, ‘Recommended Family Law Mediator’ and a ‘Leading Victorian Family Law Firm’ by Doyle’s Guide to the Australian Legal Profession.
Get Started With Vanessa
Book A
Free
Consult
Vanessa Mathews
Managing Director FDRP and Mediator
BCOMM BSW LLB
Accredited Family Law Specialist, FDRP,
Mediator and Parenting Coordinator
Vanessa Mathews is the founder and managing director of Mathews Family Law & Mediation Specialists, and has the rare combination of social work qualifications and experience, combined with nearly 20 years’ experience as a lawyer and mediator; it makes her approach to resolving legal relationship issues both sensible and sensitive.
She is a fully accredited family law specialist, mediator, family dispute resolution practitioner and parenting coordinator with a commerce degree – adding a financially astute aspect to her practice.
Vanessa has extensive experience in complex issues that arise from relationship breakdown, and works in partnership with her clients, who regularly describe her as empathetic
Vanessa is an active member of the family law profession and a member of the:
Law Institute of Victoria, Family Law Section
Law Council of Australia, Family Law Section
Resolution Institute
Australian Institute of Family Law Arbitrators and Mediators
National Mediation Accreditation System
Relationships Australia Family Lawyers Panel
Fellow of the International Academy of Family Lawyers
Relationships Australia / Federal Circuit Court ‘Access Resolve’ Mediation Service
Relationships Australia ‘Property Mediation’ Service
Vanessa and Mathews Family Law & Mediation Specialists are regularly recognised as a ‘Leading Victorian Family Lawyer’, ‘Recommended Family Law Mediator’ and a ‘Leading Victorian Family Law Firm’ by Doyle’s Guide to the Australian Legal Profession.