Almost everyone believes the starting point is half each. It is not. Here is the process the courts genuinely work through — and what changed when family violence became an express part of it in June 2025.
Photo: royalty-free and copyright-free, sourced from Pexels.
The first question almost everyone asks after separating is some version of: what am I entitled to? And the answer people expect is a number — half, or sixty-forty, or whatever a friend got.
That is not how it works. There is no formula, no percentage written into the legislation, and no presumption that you start at fifty-fifty and argue from there. What there is, is a structured process. Once you understand the process, the range of likely outcomes in your own situation usually becomes a lot clearer — and a lot less frightening.
This article walks through that process as it now stands, including the changes that commenced on 10 June 2025 and which many older articles online still do not reflect.
Australian family law does not divide assets by formula. The court's power is to make whatever order altering property interests it considers appropriate — but only if it is satisfied that making an order would be just and equitable.
That "just and equitable" question is not a box ticked at the start and then forgotten. It runs through the whole exercise. In some cases — a short relationship where the parties kept their finances entirely separate, for instance — the answer may be that no order should be made at all, and each person simply keeps what is in their name.
So the honest answer to "what am I entitled to?" is that entitlement is the output of the process, not an input to it.
Since June 2025 the framework the courts have applied through decades of case law is set out in the legislation itself. The steps are these.
Work out each person's legal and equitable interests in all property, and all liabilities. This is the whole picture: the house, savings, cars, shares, business interests, superannuation, inheritances, redundancy payments — and the mortgage, credit cards, tax debts and personal loans sitting against them.
At the same time, the court considers what each person contributed to the relationship: before it, during it, and after separation. Contributions are not only financial. Homemaking and parenting are contributions, and they are not treated as lesser ones.
The court allocates an overall percentage entitlement to each person based on that assessment of contributions. This is a broad evaluative judgement, not an accounting exercise: nobody adds up receipts and divides.
The court then considers each person's current and future circumstances — things like age, health, income and earning capacity, and the care of children. If those circumstances justify it, the court can depart from the contributions-based percentage and adjust in one person's favour.
This is often where the biggest movement happens. Two people can contribute almost identically over twenty years and still end up with very different capacities to rebuild afterwards.
The court settles on the final overall percentage, then makes orders allocating specific assets, funds and liabilities to each person to give effect to it. A percentage on paper still has to be turned into who gets the house, who refinances the mortgage, and what happens to the superannuation.
One important qualification: while that order reflects how the steps are likely to be applied in most matters, the courts are not locked into that sequence and can approach the steps in any order to reach a just and equitable outcome.
The Family Law Amendment Act 2024 commenced on 10 June 2025. Alongside codifying the framework above, it added several considerations that matter a great deal in ordinary cases.
This is the most significant change, and it operates in two distinct places.
The definition of family violence was also sharpened. Economic and financial abuse is more clearly recognised within it — the existing examples were moved into a stand-alone provision, the example about unreasonably denying financial autonomy was expanded, and new examples of dowry abuse were added.
For a lot of people this is the change that matters most, because financial control is one of the most common forms of abuse and one of the least likely to be recognised as such by the person experiencing it. Being kept off the bank accounts, having debts run up in your name, or having your access to your own income controlled is not simply an unfair marriage. It is capable of being family violence, and it is capable of affecting the division of property.
If you are in immediate danger, call 000.
Safety comes before property. These services can help with safety planning and immediate support regardless of what stage your separation is at.
Three further factors were added to the current-and-future-circumstances list:
Family violence was also added to the factors relevant to spousal maintenance, so the court can consider the economic effect of family violence when deciding what maintenance order, if any, is proper.
The duty of disclosure used to sit in the court rules. It has been lifted into the Family Law Act itself.
Each person must give the other — and the court — all relevant financial information and documents. The duty begins when you are preparing to start or are litigating a property or financial matter, and continues until the matter is resolved. Lawyers and family dispute resolution practitioners now have their own obligation to make sure you know about the duty and to encourage you to comply with it.
The consequences of ignoring it are real: costs orders, punishment for contempt of court including a fine or imprisonment, and the court taking the non-disclosure into account when deciding what orders to make. In practice, the last of those often bites hardest. A person who hides an asset and is found out has damaged their credibility on everything else in the case.
The practical takeaway is unglamorous but useful: start gathering documents early. Bank statements, tax returns, payslips, superannuation statements, loan statements, and anything relating to a business or trust.
These catch people out, particularly where a separation was amicable and nothing was ever formalised.
In limited circumstances the court's permission can be sought to apply out of time, but permission is not guaranteed and you should not plan around getting it. If you separated some time ago and never sorted out the property, that is a reason to get advice sooner rather than later — not a reason to assume the door has closed.
No, and most people do not. The great majority of property matters settle by agreement, whether directly, through negotiation between lawyers, or at mediation.
What matters is that the agreement is properly formalised. The two usual routes are an application to the court for consent orders, or a binding financial agreement. A private arrangement written on a piece of paper, or a transfer done informally, generally does not stop a claim being brought later, and does not attract the duty concessions that properly drawn orders can.
This is the part where a modest amount of legal work early tends to save a great deal of money later. We see the alternative often enough: a settlement agreed in good faith five years ago, never documented, and now being re-opened.
Most separations we see across Baulkham Hills, Norwest, Castle Hill, Kellyville and the wider Hills District have the same shape: the family home carrying most of the equity, two superannuation balances of quite different sizes, a mortgage, and often a small business or an investment property.
That shape creates a few recurring problems. The house is usually worth more than either person can refinance alone, so the real question becomes who can service the debt rather than who "should" get the home. Superannuation is frequently the second-largest asset and is routinely overlooked by the person who has less of it. And where one person ran the business, the other often has no clear idea what it is worth — which is exactly the situation the disclosure obligations exist to fix.
None of these are unusual. They are, however, much easier to deal with before positions harden.
Michael Campbell Law advises separating couples across Baulkham Hills, Norwest, Castle Hill and the wider Hills District on family law matters, including property settlements, consent orders and binding financial agreements. Where property is involved we can also handle the conveyancing side of a transfer, which keeps the whole matter in one place.
Michael handles every matter personally. The first step is a free 15-minute phone call to work out whether we can assist and what the sensible next move is. If we go further, you will receive a written costs agreement before any work begins, and fixed fees are offered where applicable.
Related reading: Do you have to move out of the home when you separate? · Legal Aid family law changes: who still qualifies in NSW? · Who gets the dog? Pets are no longer just property · Is your super covered by your will?
This article is general information only and is current as at 12 August 2026. It is not legal advice, and it does not take account of your circumstances. Family law outcomes depend heavily on the particular facts. Please obtain advice about your own situation before acting, and contact Michael Campbell Law if we can assist.
No. There is no rule that property is divided equally. The court works through a structured process that looks at what each person contributed and at their current and future circumstances, and it only makes an order at all if it is satisfied that doing so would be just and equitable. An equal split is one possible outcome, not the starting point.
Since 10 June 2025 family violence is an express consideration in the property framework. The court can take into account the effect of family violence on a person's ability to make financial and non-financial contributions and to contribute to the welfare of the family, and it can separately consider the economic effect of family violence on that person's current and future circumstances. Economic and financial abuse is also more clearly recognised within the definition of family violence in the Family Law Act.
If you were married, you generally have 12 months from the date your divorce order takes effect. If you were in a de facto relationship, you generally have two years from the date of separation. In limited circumstances the court's permission can be sought to apply out of time, but that permission is not guaranteed. Strict time limits apply, so it is worth getting advice early rather than assuming you have time.
No. Most separating couples reach agreement without a judge deciding the outcome. An agreement can be formalised by applying to the court for consent orders, or by entering a binding financial agreement. Formalising the agreement matters, because an informal arrangement or a private handshake generally does not prevent a later claim and does not give access to the duty and stamp duty concessions that properly drawn orders can.
Yes. The duty of disclosure is now written into the Family Law Act itself. Each person must give the other and the court all relevant financial information and documents, and the duty starts when you are preparing to begin a property or financial proceeding and continues until the matter is resolved. Consequences of non-compliance can include costs orders, punishment for contempt of court, and the court taking the failure into account when deciding what orders to make.
Yes. Superannuation is taken into account in a property settlement and a superannuation interest can be split between separating partners by court order or by agreement. Splitting superannuation does not turn it into cash: the amount that moves across remains superannuation for the receiving person and stays subject to the usual rules about when superannuation can be accessed.
A free 15-minute phone call is the quickest way to work out whether we can help — whether you are just separated, negotiating a settlement, or trying to formalise something you agreed a while ago.
Book a free 15-minute call Get in touch