There are advantages to going through dispute resolution. Even though it is mandatory you should approach your session with an open mind and a positive attitude. While the goal is for you and your former partner to reach an agreement, you can still experience some benefits even if you fall short of reaching an agreement.

Simply going through this process often helps former partners communicate better, understand the other’s position better, and can sometimes turn a tumultuous situation into a more amicable one. So, even if you fail to reach an agreement, the mandatory dispute resolution may still be beneficial.

After your attempt at family dispute resolution you will be issued a certificate. Even if you fail to reach an agreement, you will still need to provide the court with the certificate, which memorializes your attempt at resolution. Once the court has received the necessary certificate you may litigate your child related issues in court and the judge will ultimately made the necessary decisions.

Unfortunately, domestic disputes can lead to feelings of anger and resentment, which can manifest itself through violence. Sometimes violence is even the reason couples are seeking a divorce. If you and your former spouse have a particularly tumultuous relationship you may feel as though sitting in the same room and being forced to talking about your issues could escalate into violence.

So what do you do if dispute resolution is a mandatory step before you can apply to the court for child related orders?

The requirement to undertake dispute resolution is waived in situations where there has been a history of, or there exists a risk of, family violence or child abuse. The court has no expectation that you will attend dispute resolution if your safety is at issue in any way.

If your situation is not extreme enough to call for a waiver of this requirement, the logistics of your dispute resolution session may be altered to accommodate your apprehension. For instance, it may be possible to conduct the session with the parties in different rooms rather than siting face to face.

Your safety prior to, during, and after dispute resolution is of paramount importance. If you have any concerns about violence you should notify your family dispute practitioner or a staff member at the dispute resolution center immediately. You should also be vocal about this concern with your lawyer if you have one. Do not be afraid to bring this up – your safety is nothing to be shy about.

While there is no inherent right for grandparents to spend time with or care for their grandchildren, the Family Law Act does provide some protection for grandparents. When it comes to settling custody disputes, the court is always going to act in the best interest of the child at heart. Sometimes, this will require removing a child from the care and custody of a parent and placing that child with a grandparent. Although rare, circumstances do exist that warrant this type of action.

There are two ways in which a grandparent may seek a parenting order. The first is by making an application to communicate with and spend time with their grandchild. This type of application may be appropriate where a parent has chosen to sever our relationship with the grandparent and is not allowing the grandparent to spend meaningful time with the grandchild. A grandparent may make this application regardless of whether the parents are separated or not.

The second action available to grandparents is to apply for an order seeking parental responsibility for the child. This action will only be appropriate in extreme circumstances, where both parents have proven they are unfit or unwilling to care for the child.

Grandparents who are concerned about visitation rights may rest assured that they are permitted to take action seeking visitation, and sometimes-even custody, of their grandchildren. The guiding principle in custody actions is ‘what is in the best interest of the child,’ and the relationship between a child and their grandparent will certainly be considered. If the grandparents had historically been present and involved in the child’s life the court will be inclined to allow the grandparent to continue this relationship despite the breakdown of the parent’s relationship and their subsequent refusal to let the child spend time with the grandparent.

There is a strong preference in Australia for parents to reach an agreement regarding custody without resorting to litigation. In the hope of achieving this goal, parents are required to attend dispute resolution and make an effort to resolve any custody issues on their own.

If you are able to finalize custody through a parenting order or parenting plan, without going through litigation, your child’s wishes should certainly be a factor in how you determine custody. The guiding light when it comes to children’s issues is that you (and the court) should act in the best interest of the child. If your child voices a preference to spend more time with one parent, or there is a clear bond between the child and one parent, this should certainly be considered while you work out custody issues.

Both parents should work to reach an agreement that suits the needs of the child, and considering the child’s wishes is often the best way to determine what the best interests of the child are.

What if you aren’t able to reach an amicable custody arrangement and you require the court to determine custody? Will the court entertain your child’s preference to live with one parent over the other?

The answer is yes. The court must consider the views of the child in determining the child’s best interest. While it is not a requirement for a child to disclose his or her wishes, should they choose to express them, the court must consider them. However, simply because the child voices a preference for one parent, does not mean that parent will automatically be given preference in the custody dispute. The court will balance the child’s wishes along with their credibility. A child’s age and maturity are relevant factors in determining credibility.

So whether you plan to reach an amicable agreement with your ex-spouse, or if you must resort to litigation to decide on a custody arrangement, the child’s wishes are of the utmost importance. Considering the child’s views is a necessary step in determining the best interest of the child.

State Central Authority & Papastavrou [2008] FamCA 1120

If there exists clear evidence of grave risk of harm to the child should the child be returned to its home country, the court may prevent the child from being returned.  This is a high standard to meet, and will only apply in exceptional circumstances.

In the Papastavrou case, there was an Australian mother and a Greek father who had two children, both born in Greece. The mother, who was experiencing emotional and medical problems, was instructed by her doctor that she should return to Australia because she required the physical and emotional support of her family.

During the proceedings regarding whether the children should be returned to their home state of Greece, the mother put on compelling evidence of family violence. The evidence showed that the father repeatedly abused her, occasionally in front of the children, and had abused one of the children as well. After hearing the evidence the judge decided to reject the father’s application seeking to have the children returned to Greece.

The evidence allowed the judge to conclude that the father’s history of violence constituted a future risk of harm to the children. The mother convinced the judge that the Greek authorities would do little or nothing to protect her and the children, as they had failed to take action when she had called them in the past. The mother also provided the court with expert testimony discussing inherent issues with laws enforcing domestic violence in Greece. Additionally, the mother had developed a medical condition making her more vulnerable to future violent attacks, and this also compounded the impact future violence may have on the children.

In this case the judge was able to ultimately conclude that there was in fact a serious risk of harm to the mother and children if they were to be returned to Greece, and denied the father’s request for such.

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.

Hi, I’m Vanessa Mathews, and I want to give you some information today about spousal maintenance or support.

Many people don’t realize that the law requires one partner, either a husband or wife or de facto partner, where people are not legally married, to support each other financially. It’s not okay for one spouse to suddenly decide he or she is no longer giving any money to the other person. And even if you are divorced or the de facto relationship ends, the partner who was giving support must continue giving this financial help.

Now, the information I’m giving you applies to both married couples who divorce and de facto couples, after their relationship has ended. If you can come up with your own agreement, that’s the best way to proceed. But many people struggle to figure this one out. The law has rules and conditions for when financial support has to be given, and even how much, even after the relationship ends.

The court asks two basic questions. The first is whether or not one of the partners needs financial support or is this person able to support him or herself? But even if this person needs financial help, the judge will still ask a second question, which is, ‘Can the other partner pay me support?’ So how does a court decide if someone is entitled to support?

And how does the court decide how much money should be paid? The judge is going to consider a number of factors. He or she may look at the age of the person asking for help, and their ability to work. If one spouse or partner raised the children and is now, say, 50, with no work experience, the court might decide that he or she will have a harder time finding work at their age. So the judge might decide this person should get help. The court will also look at the person’s mental and physical health. Sometimes a person simply can’t work or cannot work in a job that will earn enough. If there are children, the court will consider who they live with, and give help accordingly.

The court also has to decide what standard of living is appropriate in each case. Now, there are a number of differences between de facto couples and couples who are legally married. There are a number of conditions that must be met for de facto couples in order for maintenance to be required. Also, de facto couples have up to two years after their relationship ends to request maintenance, while married couples have to make this request within 12 months after the divorce.

The aim of maintenance is to provide for the partner who needs it. So if a person remarries or starts a new de facto relationship, the ex-partner is no longer responsible. Their requirement to pay maintenance ends.

People often ask if they can get a tax deduction if they pay maintenance or if they have to pay income tax on maintenance they receive. The answer to both questions is no. There aren’t any tax implications for either person regarding maintenance.

I’ve tried give you some of the basics here. There are a lot of conditions and rules on maintenance, so I strongly recommend you seek advice from a lawyer specializing in family law. I’m Vanessa Mathews, for Mathews Family Law & Mediation Specialists.

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.