Goode & Goode [2006] FLC 93-286

This is a case illustrating the importance of having evidence if alleging that acts of family violence have occurred.

A husband and wife separated after ten years of marriage in 2006. The children, ages 2 and 8 lived with their mother and spent time with their father alternating weekends. The father argued that the mother was preventing the children from spending additional time with him, while the mother argued that the parties had agreed to this arrangement. The mother sought an order finalizing this alleged arrangement, while the father sought an order for an equal share care arrangement

The mother alleged that the father had engaged in family violence during their relationship.  Normally, in custody disputes, the judge must apply a rebuttable presumption that it is best for parents to have equal shared parental responsibility. However, a major exception to this presumption is where family violence has occurred.

In this case, the judge was unable to conclude that the allegations of family violence were true. Because there was a dispute as to whether the violence occurred, the judge was conflicted as to whether the aforementioned presumption should apply.  The trial judge ultimately concluded that the allegations alone did not satisfy that violence had occurred. The mother lacked sufficient evidence to prove any acts of violence, and her words alone were not enough for the judge to be satisfied on reasonable grounds that violence had occurred.

The issue of alleged violence failed to make a major impact on the outcome of the case; the court concluded that the presumption should not apply in cases where there is even a dispute regarding whether family violence occurred. However, this case still illustrates the principal that when alleging family violence, you must be prepared to show evidence that allows the judge to make a finding that family violence did in fact occur.

a finding that family violence did in fact occur. The trial court issued an order allowing the children to live with the mother, but spend time with the father on alternating weekends, as well as Monday and Tuesday evenings, and on school holidays. Had there truly been a history of family violence, it would not be safe or appropriate for the children to spend that much time unsupervised with their father.

Therefore, if there is a history of family violence in your situation, be prepared to put on evidence that allows the judge to agree with your allegation.

Whether you were party to a valid marriage or a de facto relationship, you are entitled to property division. While the courts maintain broad discretion with regard to property division, they strictly adhere to the following four-step process to determine who gets what.

1. Identify/value the property – includes all assets and liabilities
2. Consider contributions of the parties – includes financial and non-financial contributions
3. Consider relevant factors – including but not limited to age, health, income, an standard of living of the parties
4. Ensure order is just and equitable – the order must be fair

Generally, the courts will look to split the net asset pool of the parties equally, unless while applying steps one through four it is apparent that an unequal split of the assets would be just and equitable.

The goal of property division is to both to allow parties to finalise their economic relationship, and also to recognise contributions to property. However, while the goal is to allow the parties to reach economic independence, a valid property order may in fact be varied under certain circumstances.

Contact the team at Mathews Family Law to speak with a family law attorney today, and discuss your family law property settlement matter.

One of the most common concerns following separation is understanding how property will be divided.

In Australia, property settlements are governed by the Family Law Act 1975 and apply to both married couples and eligible de facto couples (including same-sex couples).

The purpose of a property settlement is not simply to divide assets. It is also intended to help finalise the financial relationship between the parties and provide certainty for the future.

The law recognises that contributions to a relationship are not limited to financial contributions. Contributions made as a homemaker, parent or through non-financial efforts are also considered.

The Importance of Finalising a Property Settlement

A formal property settlement can provide certainty and allow both parties to move forward independently.

An informal agreement between separating partners may not provide legal finality. Unless a property settlement is properly formalised, there may be a risk that a former partner could seek a property adjustment in the future.

Time limits also apply:

• Married couples generally have 12 months from the date a divorce order takes effect to commence property proceedings.
• De facto couples generally have two years from separation to commence property proceedings.

Obtaining advice early can help you understand your options and avoid unnecessary disputes.

How Does the Court Decide a Property Settlement?

Australian courts generally apply a four-step approach when determining property settlements.

Step One: Identify and Value the Property Pool

The first step is identifying all assets, liabilities and financial resources.

The property pool may include:

• real estate;
• bank accounts and investments;
• businesses and company interests;
• trusts;
• superannuation;
• vehicles and personal property;
• inheritances;
• liabilities and debts;
• other financial resources.

The value of the property is usually determined as at the date the matter is being considered, not simply the date of separation.

Once assets and liabilities are identified and valued, the net asset pool can be calculated.

Step Two: Assess Contributions

The Court considers the contributions made by each person throughout the relationship.

These may include:

Financial contributions

Examples include:

• income;
• savings;
• property purchases;
• mortgage repayments;
• business investments.

Non-financial contributions

Examples include:

• renovations;
• improvements to property;
• unpaid work that increases the value of assets.

Contributions as homemaker and parent

The law recognises that caring responsibilities and maintaining the household can be significant contributions to a relationship.

The assessment of contributions depends on the individual circumstances of each relationship.

Step Three: Consider Future Needs

The Court then considers factors that may affect the future circumstances of each person.

These may include:

• age and health;
• income and earning capacity;
• responsibility for children;
• financial resources;
• future care responsibilities;
• the impact of the relationship on earning capacity;
• other relevant financial circumstances.

This step recognises that an equal division of assets is not always an appropriate outcome.

Step Four: Is the Outcome Just and Equitable?

Finally, the Court must consider whether the proposed property division is fair in all the circumstances.

There is no automatic formula that determines how property must be divided.

Every relationship is different, and the outcome depends on the particular facts, contributions and future circumstances of each person.

Negotiated Property Settlements

Many property matters can be resolved without Court proceedings.

At Mathews Family Law & Mediation Specialists, we assist clients through a range of dispute resolution options, including:

• negotiation;
• lawyer-assisted settlement discussions;
• mediation;
• Family Dispute Resolution;
• collaborative approaches; and
• Court representation where required.

Our goal is to help clients achieve practical and legally sound outcomes while minimising unnecessary conflict and expense.

Property Settlement Lawyers Melbourne

Property settlements can involve complex issues including businesses, trusts, superannuation, inheritances and significant asset pools.

The Accredited Family Law Specialists at Mathews Family Law & Mediation Specialists provide strategic advice tailored to your circumstances and help clients throughout Australia resolve complex financial matters following separation.

Contact our team to arrange a consultation about your property settlement options.

About Vanessa Mathews — Accredited Family Law Specialist

This page was prepared and reviewed by Vanessa Mathews, Principal of Mathews Family Law & Mediation Specialists. Vanessa is an Accredited Family Law Specialist, Accredited Family Dispute Resolution Practitioner (FDRP) and Mediator who practises exclusively in family law. She assists clients throughout Australia with separation, divorce, parenting disputes, property settlements, financial agreements and other complex family law matters.

Helping families resolve conflict through specialist legal expertise and constructive dispute resolution.

Last reviewed: 24 July 2026

Disclaimer: This page provides general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Every family law matter is different and you should obtain advice tailored to your circumstances.

Maintenance – The Basics

Maintenance is available to those who were married, and also those who were part of a de facto couple. While there is no automatic right to maintenance, the court may choose to issue an order for maintenance if the facts indicate that it is proper. When faced with whether to issue an order for maintenance, the court will consider a myriad of factors, such as the ability of one party to pay, the standard of living of the spouses, the income capacity of the receiving spouse and whether it has been negatively impacted by the marriage, any child support being paid, and the health of the spouses.

When an order for maintenance is issued, it is intended to be temporary. The ultimate objective of maintenance is to help the financially disadvantaged party to reach a point of self-support. Most maintenance orders do not last more than three or four years, as the court ultimately wants all parties to reach a point of financial independence so the relationship can be finalised.

If certain specific circumstances have arisen since the order has been issued, the order may be varied. The court may only take this action, however, if one of the circumstances proscribed in the Family Law Act has occurred. An example of when an order for maintenance may be varied is where the cost of living has changed to justify a variation.

Orders for maintenance will terminate upon the occurrence of an event, for instance if either party dies or remarries. However, termination of an order does not affect your right to collect an arrearage.

Maintenance – The Details

When there is a disparity between parties’ income and earning capacity, the Family Law Act allows this disparity to be remedied through the something called “maintenance.” Typically, maintenance is only available for a short-term period – about three to four years. The idea behind only allowing a party to receive maintenance for a relatively brief period of time is that the maintenance payments are intended to compensate the recipient while that person takes steps to enter the workforce or re-establish him or herself.

Much like the approach to property division, the objective of maintenance is to work towards a “clean-break” between the parties. Maintenance is intended to be a temporary crutch to help the financially disadvantaged party get back on their feet and subsequently be able to independently support themselves.

An action for maintenance can be brought before divorce, after divorce (but within 12 months), even if the parties’ marriage is void, and after the breakdown of a de facto relationship. The two major limitations with regard to orders for maintenance are that you must get leave or court (special permission) to seek maintenance after 12 months of the divorce being final, and you cannot seek maintenance if there is a binding financial agreement that addresses maintenance.

Who Is Entitled to Maintenance?

The Family Law Act provides for three circumstances that warrant an order for maintenance for formerly married couples. Said circumstances are:

(a) by reason of having the care and control of a child of the marriage who has not attained the age of 18 years;

(b) by reason of age or physical or mental incapacity for appropriate gainful employment; or

(c)  for any adequate reason,

Additionally, the court must consider relevant factors in making this determination. Those factors include: the ability of one party to pay, the standard of living of the spouses, the income capacity of the receiving spouse and whether it has been negatively impacted by the marriage, any child support being paid, and the health of the spouses.

There is a similar provision regarding maintenance for de facto couples. While there is no automatic right to maintenance, one party may be liable to pay maintenance towards the other party to the extent that the party can reasonably do so and only in circumstances where the other party is unable to support himself or herself adequately. The test used by the courts is not whether the applicant is in need of maintenance, but rather if that person is in a position to support themselves with their own resources.

Types of Maintenance Orders

An order awarding maintenance can be made several ways; by consent, after a contested hearing or to meet urgent needs. The Family Law Act gives courts the authority to issue an urgent maintenance order without a detailed enquiry, which would normally be required upon application for maintenance. These cases are rare, and only exist where one party is in immediate need of financial assistance. These orders differ from regular maintenance orders and only last for a limited duration.

Another type of maintenance order is referred to as a secured maintenance order. This occurs where the court makes a requirement that a maintenance order be secured by some type of collateral. These orders minimise the risk of default, and also make the enforcement of a maintenance order easier.

Maintenance can be in the form of periodic payments, a lump sum, or use of the car or home. The modern trend is for maintenance to be issued in a lump sum amount. This is preferable because the objective of awarding maintenance is to provide the financially disadvantaged party temporary help to reach a level of self-support. Often, a lump sum works towards this objective better than periodic payments.

Varying and Terminating Maintenance Orders

Maintenance orders differ from other family law orders in that they may only be varied on limited grounds. In order to have the amount of a maintenance order increased or decreased, the following circumstances must have occurred since the order was made or last varied:

• the circumstances of a person who was benefiting from the order have changed
• the circumstances of the person liable to pay have changed
• the cost of living has changed to justify a variation
• the amount is not proper or adequate and the original order was made by consent
• material facts were withheld from the court or deemed false, and those facts affected the order issued by the court

While the court enjoys slightly more discretion when varying other orders in family law proceedings, it is clear that they may only vary maintenance orders for the reasons laid out above.

Once a maintenance order requiring the payment of a lump sum has been executed, and the money paid, that order can no longer be varied. Such orders are deemed to have completed and at that point cannot be altered.

An order for maintenance will terminate upon the happening of various events. It will terminate at a time prescribed in the order, when the order is discharged, when one of the parties dies, or when a party remarries. However, it is important to keep in mind that once a maintenance order terminates, your rights to collect arrears do not also terminate. If you are owed maintenance, you may still collect it despite the fact that the order is no longer in affect.

Divorce – The Details

Australia does not recognize “fault” based divorces; rather one must show that the marriage has broken down irretrievably. One may only show such a break down by establishing that the parties in fact separated, and have lived apart for at least 12 continuous months prior to filing an application for divorce. Bear in mind that the day the parties separate is not counted in the 12 month calculation. Thus, the application for divorce may not be filed until twelve months and one day have passed since separation.

While the above requirements seem fairly straightforward, a lot of questions can arise with regard to divorce. This article is designed to give you an in depth look into all of the issues surrounding divorce and answer any questions you may have.

What constitutes separation?

First, showing a physical separation between the parties for the specified time period is not enough to establish legal separation. Legal separation is more than mere physical separation, and must also evidence a breakdown of the marital relationship.

Whether parties are actually separated is going to differ from case to case, and is largely a question of fact. The law requires a substantial breakdown of the marital relationship be shown, but there is no further clarification as to what exactly that means. Australian courts have carved out three elements that are required in order to establish a valid legal separation.

• Intent. Both parties must intend to either sever or not resume the marital relationship.
• Action. The parties must act on their intent, or act as though the relationship has ended.
• Unilateral Action. If only one party considers the relationship has ended, that party must communicate such to the other party.

You may have noticed that physical separation is missing from the above elements. Does that mean that you can have a valid legal separation while still living in the same home? Surprisingly, the answer is yet. The Family Law Act of 1975 addresses this issue head on and specifically states that a separation can exist even where the parties have continued to reside in the same residence.

Bear in mind however, that courts are cognizant of false claims of separation so it is advised that the parties have evidence to corroborate that they are separated despite living under the same roof. The aforementioned elements of intent and action must still exist, so if you chose to remain roommates while separated, make sure you can still prove both. Also, you will have to submit an affidavit which details the arrangements you have made with regard to where each party sleeps, the extent of household services rendered, if there are separate bank accounts, etc. You are also required to have a witness, such as a family member, friend, or neighbor submit an independent affidavit to corroborate your separation.

Remaining in the same house during your separation may have some benefits, for instance, it is less expensive, and if you have children it will be less disruptive on their lives. However, if you chose such an arrangement you must be prepared to disclose personal information such as sleeping arrangements to the court in your affidavit.

What about the resumption of cohabitation?

Say you separate, and then a few months into your separation you and your ex decide to try and make things work. You move back in with your ex and give it a shot. What effect does this have on your otherwise valid separation?

First, resuming cohabitation is not as easy as simply moving back in together – as we discussed previously, you can still be legally separated and living under the same roof. In order for cohabitation to affect your separation, your new relationship needs to look similar to the way it did when you were married. For instance, simply moving back in together will not be enough to establish the status of resumption of cohabitation, this only exists when the relationship mirrors, or is substantially similar to your previous relationship. Additionally the occasional slip up, or casual acts of intercourse will not be enough to establish a resumption of cohabitation.

The major thing to keep in mind regarding resumption of cohabitation is how long the cohabitation lasts. Should your reconciliation last less than three months, you are permitted to count the time you were separated prior to getting back together in calculating the twelve months of separation required before being eligible to apply for a divorce. On the other hand, if your reconciliation lasts for three months or longer, you must begin a new twelve-month period of separation before you may file an application for divorce.

If you resume cohabitation after you have already filed for divorce, it may be grounds for the court to refuse your application. The court will look at your relationship as of the date of the hearing (not the date you filed your application), to determine if the application should be denied based on reconciliation. The party wishing to show the reconciliation must bring evidence in support of her argument. However, a reconciliation after filing for divorce does not mean your application will automatically be denied. The court will look at your unique circumstances and make a decision based on such.

How do I apply for divorce?

After you have been legally separated for twelve months, you, your partner or both of you jointly may file for divorce. However, the court will only entertain an application filed by a party who is a citizen of Australia, has been an ordinary resident in Australia for at least twelve months prior to filing, or is domiciled in Australia.

The actual application form can be downloaded at www.fmc.gov, and may be filed in the Federal Circuit Court in all states and territories. However, in Western Australia your application must be filed in the Family Court of Wester Australia. Should you prefer to have a lawyer apply for a divorce on your behalf, go to www.divorce-online.com.au.

If you and your ex are not filing jointly for divorce, but rather you are unilaterally filing the application, you will need to serve your ex spouse with the following documents.

• A sealed copy of the application for divorce
• A copy of the brochure Marriage, Families and Separation
• The form of acknowledgment of service
• Copies of any additional documents filed with the court
• If served by post, a stamped self addressed envelope

There are two ways in which you can effectuate service; you can do so by post, or personally by a person other than yourself who is over the age of 18. If you are serving someone in Australia, you must do so 28 days prior to the hearing date. If service is taking place outside of Australia then it must take place at least 42 days before the hearing. Additionally, if you know your ex spouse is represented by a lawyer, you should check with their lawyer as they may have been instructed to accept service on their client’s behalf.

If you are unable to locate the person you wish to serve, the court can either permit substituted service or dispensation of service. In either case you will need to apply this type of service, and submit an affidavit explaining why the respondent cannot be located. The court will only grant your application if it is satisfied that you have taken the appropriate steps to locate the respondent prior to filing an application for substituted service or dispensation of service.

What happens at the divorce hearing?

Once you have successfully submitted your application for divorce, and served your ex spouse, there will be a hearing. If you filed your application for divorce jointly the hearing will take place within 28 days of filing, otherwise the hearing will take place within 42 days after the filing (56 days if the respondent is not in Australia).

If your application for divorce is successful, the court will issue an order for divorce. This order will automatically take effect one month after the order is granted. Should reconciliation take place after the order is issued but prior to the order taking effect, the court has the discretion to rescind the divorce order.

It is important to bear in mind that your application and hearing for divorce is limited to just that. This is not the venue for you to raise issues regarding support, maintenance, and child support. The court has an interest in making sure that arrangements have been made with regard to any children affected by the divorce, but no matters beyond such arrangements will be raised at the divorce hearing.

Divorce – The Basics

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.

1. There must be no current order about property or maintenance.
2. There must be no agreement between the parties enforceable under the state law in existence.
3. The parties must consent in writing.
4. The parties must have received independent legal advice as to the advantages and disadvantages of making the choice.
5. 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.