Tag: legal separation australia

Many married Australians own properties in the country and or overseas. What happens to these properties in the unfortunate event of a divorce?

A recent verdict by the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia in Anderson & McIntosh’s (2013) FLC 93-568 case showed.

The Anderson & McIntosh Case

The couple involved in the case, married in Australia in 1988. They shifted base to another country in 2006 and then separated in 2009. Finally got divorced overseas in December 2010. A decree from a foreign country relating to the properties was issued. There were no Orders sought for the couple’s properties in Australia.

The parties reached an agreement on the settlement of the properties in the foreign land, which received approval from the Court in that country. During the same time, a divorce decree was issued. The foreign court’s ruling did not deal with the couple’s properties in Australia.

The wife made an application to an Australian court in relation to the property settlement 12 months after the divorce. The Husband sought to have her application dismissed citing the reason that it had been more than 12 months since the divorce and that the S 44(3) of the Act necessitated a Leave of Court for instituting court proceedings, with respect to the settlement of properties in Australia.

The Husband’s plea was dismissed and so he made an appeal to the Full Court, which was also dismissed.

Overseas Divorce not a “Divorce Order”

The following are the key points from the Full Court verdict in the Anderson & McIntosh case:

• A divorce obtained overseas is recognized under Section 109 of the Family Law Act 1975. But, under the Act, the rights that the parties are entitled to in an overseas divorce are not the same as in the case of a divorce obtained in Australia.
• Section 44(3) of the Act does not recognize an overseas divorce as a “divorce order”. So, a Leave of Court – permission from the Court to take an action – is not needed to begin legal proceedings in Australia even if it has been 12 months or more since the divorce

Options to Reduce Overseas Divorce Impact

The following options could have been explored by the Husband in the above case to reduce the impact of the overseas divorce:

• The Husband could have appealed for property settlement of the Australian properties in the foreign country provided such a plea is acceptable in that country.
• The Husband could have sought orders in relation to property settlement for the properties in Australia at the same time as orders were being sought by the Wife in the foreign country. The Husband could also have entered into a financial agreement as specified by the Act for a property settlement with respect to the Australian properties.
• The Husband could have sought a divorce in Australia.

If you are to undertake getting divorced overseas, it is critical to understand the legalities surrounding property settlement in that country and any country you own properties.

A mutually agreeable decision can be reached only when all facts are available. The assistance of legal experts in such cases becomes invaluable.

Get in touch with the legal experts at Mathews Family Law & Mediation. We are one of Melbourne’s leading law firms with years of experience and a track record of delivering successful outcomes in divorce proceedings, family law property settlement, child support, spousal maintenance, mediation and a range of other family law issues.

Click here to request a free initial consultation or call 1300 635 529 now.

Dear Friends

Last weekend I attended the AFCC Australian Chapter conference in Adelaide.

The conference topic was ‘Alienation? Myths, complexities and possibilities …’.

The caliber of the papers was excellent.

I was particularly interested in the workshop offered by Dr. Philip Stahl, Psychologist, on domestic violence differentiation, personality disorders and unconscious bias.

Also of great interest was the current research on high conflict separations, alienation and children resisting contact with parents.

Early identification and intervention are the keys to avoiding the escalation of ‘mere conflict’ into alienation and the devastating impact on children (regardless of age).

We heard from our local well-known Psychologists Dr. Jenni Neoh and Ms. Lisa Bottomley in particular about their respective intervention programs for complex family matters.

We often work with families facing experiencing particular difficulty with their post-separation parenting – with young and old children. We will be recommending Jenni and Lisa’s very special approaches to these clients in the hope of achieving an early and effective resolution.

The AFCC website provides a wealth of excellent resources, including conference papers http://afccnet.org.au/ . You may like to consider becoming a member.

We continue to offer a free initial telephone consultation to your clients in need of family law advice – they simply need to call us on 1300 635 529 or email enquiries@mflaw.com.au to book a time for one of our family law specialists to speak with them.

And remember, we’re always happy to help you out with any questions you may have. Stay in touch,

Vanessa and the Team at Mathews Family Law & Mediation Specialists

Second marriages, partnerships, step-families present challenges, new opportunities after legal separation, divorce

Relationships Australia has prepared this informative summary about the challenges and complications of re-partnering after Legal separation, or divorce.

In second partnerships, couples are often more aware of the difficulties in establishing a successful relationship and are more committed to making the marriage work.

Both second marriages and step-families have to overcome some difficult hurdles. These hurdles can present significant challenges to the couple in their relationship as partners and as parents.

Unfortunately, many second marriages and step-families, despite their commitment to making things work, fail to get over these hurdles.

This page outlines some of the challenges and complications of re-partnering and step-families.

The decision to re-marry or re-partner

Before you re-marry or re-partner, you should consider the following questions:

• When?
• Why?
• To Whom?

Listen to any doubts. If necessary, wait a little longer

When?

The simple answer is after you have fully come to terms with the end of your previous relationship. This is particularly important if you did not want the first marriage to end, and had to deal with the pain of leaving or being left by your previous partner.  It takes longer than many people expect to get over the end of a long-term relationship, even if you were unhappy and felt that the end was inevitable.

Some studies suggest many people take at least two years to adjust to the end of a long-term relationship. There are many exceptions to this. Some people take longer, others adjust more rapidly. Ask yourself:

• Do I find myself thinking about my ex-partner and do these thoughts still arouse strong feelings such as anger and resentment?
• Have I adjusted to living alone again?
• Have I regained a sense of self-confidence?
• Can I look back on that relationship and recognise some of the things that contributed to its breakdown?

In other words, am I emotionally free to re-partner? Can I put all my emotional energy into this new relationship without allowing my feelings about my previous relationship to get in the way?

Just as you cannot re-marry until you are legally free to do so, being emotionally free to re-marry is also important.

Why?

Unfortunately, this question is often overlooked. Are you thinking of re-marrying or re-partnering because you want to be with someone whom you love or do you want to re-marry or re-partner for the sake of being in a relationship or to provide a two-parent home for your children? Being alone is not easy after being married or in a long-term relationship, especially if you have children living with you. However, moving too rapidly into a new relationship can create a new set of problems.

To whom?

Past experiences influence our choice of partners. This is especially true of a second marriage. Be realistic about what worked and what didn’t work in your first marriage when making a decision about a new partner. Learn from that experience to clarify what sort of partner you want.

Being in love is not enough to make a relationship work especially once the initial excitement has worn off.

The following organizations offer separation, and divorce counselling:

Family Relationships Centre:  http://www.familyrelationships.gov.au/searchpages/searchpage.aspx?KEYWORD=frc%20not%20pop&RESOURCETYPES=Service

Relationships Australia: http://www.relationships.org.au/what-we-do/services/counselling

CatholicCare: http://www.ccam.org.au/

Family Mediation Centre: https://www.fmc.org.au/marriage-counselling.php?gclid=Cj0KEQiAqK-zBRC2zaXc8MOiwfIBEiQAXPHrXsvDPeRotm4nM6DHg4zIk5QIa_fiidlbpIzCf9gbUlYaAoXl8P8HAQ

There are a number of practical steps to take regarding your credit cards after you separate.

1. Write down the date you actually separated. Even better, send an email to your spouse or partner stating clearly that “on May 1, 2014, we officially separated”. This date may become important later on when and if debts need to be divided. If your spouse incurred the debt after the date of separation, the court may hold him responsible for it when dividing up property.
2. If possible, get rid of joint credit cards. If you are the primary cardholder – great!  You can lower the credit limit, which prevents your spouse from going crazy with the card and running up more debt.  The best option is to cancel the card altogether if the company allows it.  If your name is on the account, no matter who runs up the debt, you are also responsible.
3. Make sure to print out all of your balances from your credit card account, including all purchases and payments. Even if you are held accountable, when the time comes to draw up a property settlement, you may be able to have these listed as your spouse’s debt and deducted from his share of the assets.
4. Discuss with your lawyer signing a legal separation agreement. Written correctly, this may limit your liability for your spouses’ debts, including credit card debts.

When a couple divorces (or de facto or same-sex couples terminate their relationship), one of the major decisions to make is “who gets what”.  A pre-nuptial agreement may help make this division easier.  If a couple can decide between them and come up with their own agreement, long court battles can be avoided. If not, the courts have their own way of dealing with property division. In Australia, the courts place all property into one pool and then divide it “equitably” or fairly.  Everything is included and considered joint property by the courts.

The law governing property division(link to “Property Division FAQs”) between spouses or de facto couples is Part VIII of the Family Law Act, 1975 (FLA). The law provides guidelines for the courts to use when dividing property. There are a number of factors the court will consider and which couples should know about.  Below is a list of some considerations.

Think about the children

Before even entering into the fight, divorcing couples should consider their children when dividing up property. It might be more “fair” to sell the marital home, but parents (if they can afford to) should also consider the impact of this change on the children. If parents are going to share parenting time, they should think about what children will need in each home and also divide accordingly. If one parent is moving to a smaller home, he or she might not have space for so much furniture, so why demand it just for the sake of being fair. Both parents should consider the physical and emotional needs of their children, not just what they themselves believe they are entitled to receive. 

Depreciation of ownership rights

Over time, the contribution of the person who brought the property decreases and the contribution of the other partner increases. For example, one person may have purchased the house prior to the marriage, but the other partner paid most of the mortgage on it for the next 20 years.  The investment in the house may be equal by the time the couple splits up and the court will consider this relevant in making an equitable distribution.

The value of the property when it was acquired.

The courts will consider the value of the property when it was brought into the marriage as well as the length of the marriage. There is a difference between a house that was worth $100,000 and one worth $2 million. If a couple was married for only a short period and during that time the marital home tripled in value, how much is the spouse who purchased it prior to the marriage entitled to?  How much is the other spouse, who paid next to nothing in terms of mortgage and maintenance, entitled to?

Non-financial contribution

The courts in Australia today recognize that in many marriages today, one partner may earn a high salary while the other contributes to the marriage in a non-financial capacity. This role has a value that also needs to be measured for property purposes. Many couples decide that one partner will stay home to care for the house and children. This enables the other partner to obtain an education, gain professional experience and earn a higher wage. The stay-at-home parent is entitled to financial compensation for his or her job at home and for allowing the other spouse professional development.

The parent who stays at home makes other large non-financial contributions to the home. By being at home, the family saves thousands of dollars on child care and possibly cleaners and cooks. Finally, the at-home spouse may undertake do-it-yourself jobs, like painting, also worth a good deal of money to the family, but without any actual monetary compensation.  Imagine a spouse who repaints the inside of the house.  Not only has the family saved on the expense of paying an outside contractor but the value of the home has also increased.

Use and maintenance of the property

The court will consider not only the worth of the couple’s property but also how it is used. In one family, for example, the father stays home to care for the children. He is responsible for all household work – cooking, cleaning, gardening, and paying bills. The mother, in turn, works long hours to provide a good income and financial stability.  No doubt the mother “earned” her share of the house, but so did the father. The court might ask who actually needs the home more. In this case, the court may consider equitable distribution to mean that the father keeps the house and the mother receives other property.

Future needs

Section 75(2) of the FLA lays out the factors a court uses to determine the “future needs” of each spouse. The court considers age, health, professional training and ability and property and financial resources, among other factors.  Based on this analysis, the court may decide that a particular spouse is entitled to more of the marital property, to compensate for that person’s weaker ability to earn a living.

A man met a lady from Russia. He traveled to Russia, married her and brought her back to Australia. The relationship was the only reason for the lady to be in Australia. The parties entered into a Binding Financial Agreement on return to Australia. No copy was given to the wife, the agreement took away many of the entitlements Australian family law would have provided to her. She claimed she signed the agreement when she was under physical, mental and emotional stress from her husband. Despite obtaining independent legal advice prior to the agreement who had correctly told her the agreement was likely to disadvantage her if she signed it, she signed it in any case, the Federal Magistrate concluded the husband’s actions could be recognized as causing duress and were enough to be regarded as unconscionable conduct which allowed for the agreement to be set aside. The Magistrate also noted that the failure to give his wife a copy of the agreement was a breach of the legislation.

Reconciliation and resumption of cohabitation can have a monumental effect on your divorce proceedings. A reconciliation will affect your date of separation, which in turn can affect property division and other aspects of your case. The impact of reconciliation combined with the attitude that the courts generally prefer parties to reconcile has resulted in some special rules with regard to reconciliation and resumption of cohabitation.

First, with regard to reconciliation, if the court determines that based on the evidence or attitude of the parties, a reasonable possibility of reconciliation exists, the court has the power to suspend the proceedings. This adjournment is designed to allow the parties the time and opportunity to consider reconciliation. However, if either party wishes to resume court proceedings, the court is compelled to grant this request.

Moving back in together, more specifically, resumption of cohabitation can also have a huge impact on your divorce proceedings. If your resume cohabiting, and then later agree to separate again, the period of time you had previously been separated may not apply when trying to meet the twelve-month separation requirement for divorce.

Now you may be wondering – what exactly equates to a resumption of cohabitation? The answer is that both parties must intend to resume cohabiting, act on that intention, and also be living on substantially the same terms as they were prior to the separation. An agreement to move back in together that never comes to fruition does not meet this standard. Also, simply moving in under the same roof but not resuming other aspects of the marital relationship will not equate to a resumption of cohabitation.

If you are considering moving back in with your ex, you should be aware of the special rules regarding the resumption of cohabitation. As we mentioned earlier, the court has a preference for parties to make amends, and they would prefer parties at least attempt reconciliation if there is a chance it might work rather than be too afraid to try because of the impact that reconciliation can have on the divorce proceedings. For this very reason, the court allows parties to move back in together for one period of time up to three months without there being any prejudice to their application for the divorce process in Australia.

Practically speaking, if you resume cohabiting and then separate again within three months, you may use the period of time you were previously separated in calculating the twelve-month requirement. On the other hand, if your resumption of cohabitation lasts for three months or longer, you will have to separate for a further twelve months before you can file for divorce.