Most separations don’t need a courtroom, and the ones that end up there usually got there because nobody explained the position early. We’ll tell you what the property pool actually looks like, what the law now requires the court to consider, and what your time limits are, which are not the ones most people assume. Then we’ll help you resolve it in the way that costs you least, in money and in everything else.
Separated recently? A first conversation costs nothing and changes what’s possible.
Every one of these has a different answer depending on how long ago it was. Tap the one that's yours.
Property and divorce are separate processes. You do not have to be divorced to settle property, and waiting for a divorce only leaves it unresolved for longer.
Acting in property settlements, parenting arrangements and de facto claims, in the Federal Circuit and Family Court.
Family law is the one area where the legal answer and the right answer are most often different things. A position you could win in two years may cost more than it is worth, in fees and in what is left of the relationship you still have to co-parent through. Our job is to tell you what the law gives you, what it would cost to get it, and what the sensible landing point looks like. Then to get there without making it worse.
Identifying the pool, contributions, current and future circumstances, superannuation, and the statutory framework that applies from 10 June 2025.
Establishing that the relationship existed and when it ended, the jurisdictional threshold, and the same property rights as married couples.
Formalising an agreement so it binds, so it is hard to unpick later, and so the property transfer attracts stamp duty relief.
Before, during or after the relationship, with the independent advice and certificates each side must have for the agreement to hold.
Interim and ongoing support, need and capacity, and the requirement since June 2025 to consider the economic effect of family violence.
Valuation, splitting orders and flagging, including defined benefit schemes, where getting the valuation wrong gets expensive.
Living arrangements, time, decision-making, relocation and school disputes, decided on what is in the child's best interests.
Assessments, change of assessment applications, and binding and limited child support agreements.
Apprehended domestic violence orders, safety planning, and the direct effect family violence now has on a property settlement.
Family dispute resolution, arbitration for property, and negotiated settlements. Most matters end here, and the ones that do end cheaper.
Separation doesn’t start the clock. For married couples the divorce order does, and for de facto couples separation is the only thing that ever will.
Almost everyone assumes the clock starts at separation. For married couples it doesn't, and for de facto couples it's the only thing that does.
There are two limitation periods in Australian family law and which one applies to you depends on a single question: whether you were married. Married couples get twelve months from the divorce order, which means the clock does not start at all until someone applies for a divorce. De facto couples get two years from separation, and nothing has to happen for that clock to start running. Both are set by s 44 of the Family Law Act, and both are missed for the same reason, which is that people assume separation is the trigger. For half of them it isn’t, and for the other half it already was.
From the date the divorce order takes effect, not from separation. If you never apply for a divorce this clock never starts, which is why some couples settle property years after separating.
From the date of separation. There is no divorce to trigger it, so this is the clock that catches de facto couples out, and it is the harder of the two to get around afterwards.
There is no statutory deadline for a parenting application. But arrangements that run unchallenged for six months become the status quo, and the status quo is hard to unwind.
You must be separated for twelve months before you can apply for a divorce. Separation under one roof counts, with evidence. This is the only clock here that runs from separation for married couples.
Out of time is not always the end of it, but the two situations are not equal. A married couple can apply late by consent of both parties, or with the court's leave on hardship grounds. A de facto couple has no consent route at all and must seek leave. Ask before you assume the answer, and ask before the other side has any reason to say no.
It depends on whether you were married, and the two dates can be years apart. Twenty minutes, no charge.
The biggest reform to property settlement since 2009. It applies whether or not your matter ever reaches a courtroom.
The Family Law Amendment Act 2024 commenced on 10 June 2025 and rewrote how property is divided. The framework the courts had built up in case law is now in the legislation, family violence has moved from the edge of the analysis to the centre of it, and one long-standing practice has been abolished outright. If you were advised before that date, or you are reading a page that was written before it, some of what you were told is no longer the law.
It applies to you whether or not you go to court. The changes apply to new and existing proceedings, and to couples negotiating outside court, except where a final hearing had already started on that date. If you were advised before June 2025, or you are reading a page written before it, some of what you were told no longer holds.
What the courts did as a matter of convention is now legislation. Identify the existing legal and equitable interests in the property, assess each party's contributions, assess each party's current and future circumstances, and ask whether the orders are just and equitable.
It sounds like housekeeping. It isn't. A framework in the statute is easier to argue from and easier to appeal against than one assembled out of case law, and it removes the room a well-resourced party used to have to argue about the method itself.
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 79 · s 90SM for de facto couplesThe definition of family violence now names economic and financial abuse in its own right. The examples include controlling or restricting access to money and bank accounts, running up debt in a partner's name without consent, hiding assets to disadvantage them in a settlement, sabotaging their ability to hold down a job, and dowry abuse.
This matters most to the people it was written for: someone who left a long relationship with nothing, not because they contributed nothing, but because they were never permitted to hold anything in their own name. That is now a statutory consideration, not an argument you have to construct.
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 4ABThe court must now consider the effect of family violence on a party's ability to make contributions, and separately on their current and future circumstances. Two considerations, not one, and the same requirement now runs through spousal and de facto maintenance.
This codifies the principle in Kennon and goes past it. Under the old approach the argument was available but narrow and difficult to run. It is now a step the court is required to take.
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 79(4) and 79(5)The court now identifies only the property that exists at the time of trial. Money already spent cannot be notionally put back on the balance sheet, which is what practitioners meant by an add-back: legal fees paid out of the pool, premature distributions, and assets gambled or wasted away.
It still counts, but it counts somewhere else. Dissipation and wastage are now weighed through contributions and through current and future circumstances instead of being restored to the pool as a number. The practical effect is that proving how money was spent matters more than it ever has, and that acting early to preserve assets beats arguing about them afterwards.
Settled by the Full Court in Shinohara & Shinohara [2025] FedCFamC1A 126, decided in July 2025, which departed from the earlier line of authority on notional property.
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 79(3)A companion animal is no longer ordinary property to be valued and traded off. The court can give sole ownership to one party, order a transfer to someone else who consents, or order a sale. It cannot order joint ownership or shared time, deliberately, so the animal does not become a standing reason to keep contact going.
In deciding, the court considers who has cared for and paid for the animal, any attachment a party or a child has to it, any history of actual or threatened abuse towards it, and who can realistically care for it going forward.
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 79(6)The duty to disclose your financial position in full has been lifted out of the court rules and into the Act itself. Non-disclosure was always a bad idea. It is now a bad idea with statutory teeth, and it applies whether or not anyone has filed anything.
General information only. The Family Law Act applies across Australia and this page describes it in general terms. It is not legal advice for your situation. Reviewed September 2026, and reviewed again on each amendment to the Act.
The changes are not a reason to reopen a settlement you have already finalised, and they will not turn a weak claim into a strong one.
They matter most where the old framework had nothing useful to say: a partner who was never allowed money in their own name, a pool that was spent down before anyone filed, an animal being used to keep a foot in the door. If any of that describes your separation, say so on the first call. It is now a statutory consideration rather than an argument to be built.
Advised before June 2025?
Twenty minutes, no charge. Tell us what you were told and we’ll tell you what still holds, what has changed, and whether it changes your position.
A separation is not a file to be handed down a chain
Description: The detail that decides a property settlement is the detail you are trying not to think about. It doesn't survive a handover.
Separation is one of the few legal problems where the client is living inside the matter while it runs. The detail that decides a property settlement is the same detail you are trying not to think about: what was in whose name, who paid what, what was said in the kitchen in March. That detail does not survive being handed down a chain of people.
At BOS Legal the person you speak to first is the person who runs the matter. We will tell you what the pool looks like, what the framework now requires the court to weigh, and where a sensible settlement lands, including when that is less than you were hoping for. Then we will try to get there without a hearing, because most separations do not need one and the ones that end up there are usually more expensive than the difference being argued about.
Two questions decide the shape of everything that follows. Which clock applies to you, and what is actually in the pool. Neither takes long to answer, and both are worth answering before you make a decision you cannot take back.
The property rules changed on 10 June 2025. Advice given against the old framework is advice about a law that no longer applies.
Court is for the matters where the other side will not disclose, will not negotiate, or where there is a genuine safety issue. Not for the rest.
Grosvenor Place, 225 George Street, minutes from the Federal Circuit and Family Court. Most of a matter runs by phone, video and email.
Calm advice, current law, and a realistic view of where this lands.
The property framework changed on 10 June 2025, and the Full Court settled what it means for add-backs the following month. Advice given against the old framework is advice about a law that no longer applies. A good deal of what is written online still describes it.
Most matters resolve without a hearing, through negotiation, family dispute resolution or mediation, and are formalised by consent orders. The ones that go to court should go there for a reason, not because nobody managed the temperature along the way.
What the law gives you, what it would cost to get it, and where the sensible landing point is. Including when that is less than you hoped, and including when the answer is that the fight is worth less than the fee.
Grosvenor Place, 225 George Street, minutes from the Federal Circuit and Family Court. Most of a family law matter runs by phone, video and email, wherever in New South Wales you are.
Separation changes who should inherit from you long before the property settlement is finished, and in New South Wales separating does not revoke a will at all. Even a divorce only deals with part of it, and superannuation is usually outside the will entirely. If the person you have just left is still your executor and beneficiary, that is the next conversation.
No charge for the first conversation. Confidential.
Just separated?
Which clock applies depends on whether you were married. Most people are watching the wrong one.
Separation does not start the married clock. A divorce order does.
Separation & Property
Sydney CBD. Separated recently? The sooner we see it, the more options you have.
It depends on whether you were married. If you were married, you have 12 months from the date the divorce order takes effect, not from separation. If you never apply for a divorce, that clock never starts, which is why some people settle property years after separating. If you were in a de facto relationship, you have two years from the date of separation, and there's no divorce to trigger anything, so that's the deadline that catches de facto couples out. If you're out of time you can seek the court's permission to apply late, but it isn't granted automatically.
No, and usually you shouldn't wait. Divorce and property settlement are separate processes under the Family Law Act. You can negotiate, sign consent orders or make a binding financial agreement at any point after separation. Waiting for a divorce just means the property stays unresolved and the market moves underneath both of you.
No. There's no starting presumption of equal division in Australian family law, and anyone who tells you there is has told you something that isn't in the Act. The court identifies the pool, assesses each party's financial and non-financial contributions including as homemaker and parent, then assesses each party's current and future circumstances, and asks whether the proposed orders are just and equitable. From June 2025 those steps are set out in the legislation itself. The outcome depends on your facts.
Yes, and more directly than it used to. Since 10 June 2025 the court must consider the effect of family violence on a party's contributions and on their current and future circumstances, and economic or financial abuse is expressly recognised as a form of family violence. Controlling someone's access to money, denying financial autonomy, and dowry abuse are named examples. If that describes your relationship, raise it early, because it's now a statutory consideration rather than an argument you have to build from case law.
Consent orders are approved by the court, which checks the agreement is just and equitable, and they attract stamp duty relief on property transfers. A binding financial agreement isn't reviewed by the court, gives you more freedom to agree unusual terms, and requires both parties to have independent legal advice with a certificate from each lawyer. Consent orders are harder to set aside. Financial agreements are more flexible but more vulnerable if the formalities weren't followed. Which suits you depends on what you're agreeing.
Broadly, yes, if you were in a de facto relationship. De facto partners, including same-sex partners, have essentially the same property and maintenance rights as married couples. The threshold questions are whether the relationship existed and when it ended, which can be genuinely contested, and whether you meet a jurisdictional requirement such as two years' duration, a child, or substantial contributions. And the deadline is two years from separation.
As property. Super forms part of the pool and can be split by order or agreement, though splitting doesn't convert it to cash: it stays in the superannuation system until a condition of release is met. Valuation is straightforward for accumulation accounts and considerably less so for defined benefit schemes, which is where getting it wrong gets expensive.
Usually not. Most separating couples resolve property and parenting through negotiation, family dispute resolution or mediation, and formalise the result with consent orders. For parenting matters, family dispute resolution is generally required before you can file, with limited exceptions including family violence. Court is for the matters where the other side won't disclose, won't negotiate, or where there's a genuine safety issue.
Bring what you have: the mortgage statement, super balances, and roughly when you separated.
Twelve months or two years, what the property actually consists of, and where a realistic settlement lands.
A written estimate before any work begins. No open accounts.
Sydney and regional NSW court appearances for interstate and out-of-town solicitors. Fixed fee, same-day confirmation, court-by-court pricing.
Contract, shareholder, debt and business disputes in every NSW court. A written view on prospects and cost before you commit to a fight.
Unfair dismissal, general protections, redundancy and restraints of trade. Acting for employees and employers. Strict 21-day deadlines apply.
Separation, property settlement, parenting arrangements and de facto claims. Clear advice at a difficult time, without inflaming it.
Wills, powers of attorney, probate and estate administration, and contesting a will in NSW. Structured properly the first time, so your family isn't left arguing.
Company structures, shareholders agreements, contracts and business sales. Set up properly now, so the dispute never starts.
Leave your name and number. A lawyer calls you back, tells you where you stand and what happens next. No charge, no obligation.
Twenty minutes with a lawyer. You'll leave the call knowing where you stand, what your options are, and what the first step costs.
