Family Law Reform and Process in Australia : Koffels Solicitors and Barristers

How the current legal framework operates, and what the 2024 reforms mean for complex matters

Australian family law has undergone more substantial change in the past four years than in the preceding two decades. The merger of the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court in 2021 restructured the court system entirely. The Family Law Amendment Act 2024 then introduced the most significant legislative reforms since the Family Law Act was enacted in 1975. Both developments have practical consequences for parties in family law proceedings and for the professionals who advise them.

This hub page covers the current court structure, the key changes introduced by the 2024 reforms, the dispute resolution options available before and instead of litigation, and what the process of a contested family law matter actually looks like from beginning to end.

Part of the Koffels complex family law guide.

The current court structure

Since 1 September 2021, family law proceedings at first instance in Australia have been heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (FCFCOA). The merger of the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia into a single court was the largest structural reform to the family law system since its establishment, and it continues to bed in.

The FCFCOA operates two divisions. Division 1 handles the most complex matters — including those involving significant property disputes, serious allegations of child abuse, international elements, and questions of law requiring appellate-level consideration at first instance. Division 2 handles the broader range of family law work. The allocation of matters between divisions is determined by complexity and the nature of the issues involved.

Appeals from decisions of the FCFCOA lie to the Full Court of the FCFCOA, constituted by three judges. Further appeal lies to the High Court of Australia, but only by special leave — a threshold that requires the matter to raise a question of law of public importance or to be in the interests of justice.

In practice, the merger has produced a more unified case management approach, with matters less likely to fall between the procedural cracks that existed when two separate courts operated parallel jurisdictions. Complex property and parenting matters are now case-managed from an earlier stage, with greater emphasis on identifying and narrowing the real issues before significant costs are incurred.

The Family Law Amendment Act 2024: what changed

The Family Law Amendment Act 2024 received royal assent in November 2023 and commenced in stages through 2024 and into 2025. The reforms addressed three broad areas: parenting, property, and miscellaneous procedural and definitional changes.

Parenting reforms

The most significant parenting changes were the removal of the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility and the restructuring of the best interests framework.

The presumption of equal shared parental responsibility, introduced in 2006, had created a widely misunderstood assumption in the community that separated parents were entitled to equal time with their children. The presumption related to decision-making responsibility, not time, but the confusion it generated was significant, and courts spent considerable resources correcting it. Its removal simplifies the framework: courts now approach parenting arrangements by asking directly what arrangements will best serve this particular child, without starting from any presumption.

The best interests framework was consolidated from a two-tiered structure into a single list of considerations, with greater emphasis on protecting children from family violence and harm. The reforms also strengthened the legislative recognition of coercive control as a form of family violence and introduced new requirements for courts to consider whether proposed parenting arrangements are safe.

A new general principle was also introduced, requiring courts to consider whether it is safe to make an order that would require parents to consult each other about decisions regarding the child. This is a practical acknowledgment that joint decision-making — previously the default in most cases — is not appropriate where the relationship between the parents involves power imbalance, fear, or family violence.

Property reforms

The property reforms were less dramatic in scope but significant in their detail. The amendments codified the four-step framework for property settlement that courts had applied through case law for decades, providing a clearer legislative basis for the analytical process and reducing scope for argument about whether courts were applying the correct approach.

The reforms also introduced new provisions addressing economic abuse as a factor relevant to the assessment of contributions. Where one party has engaged in economic abuse — defined consistently with the family violence provisions — courts can now take that conduct into account when assessing the contributions of the parties to the acquisition and conservation of property. This aligns the property framework more closely with the recognition of financial abuse as a form of family violence.

Companion animals

The 2024 amendments introduced specific provisions regarding the ownership of companion animals — pets — in property settlements. Courts are now required to consider the animal’s best interests (not merely its monetary value) when making property orders, and must take into account factors including the history of ownership and care of the animal, family violence, and the likely impact on any children of the relationship. While this may appear minor in the context of high-value property matters, it reflects a broader legislative direction toward recognising the non-financial dimensions of family relationships in the legal framework.

What the reforms mean in practice

For parties in complex family law matters, the practical effect of the 2024 reforms is most significant in two areas. First, parenting matters involving any element of family violence or coercive control will be assessed through a more robust framework that is less susceptible to minimisation of non-physical forms of abuse. Second, property matters where one party has engaged in economic abuse now have a clearer pathway for that conduct to affect the contributions assessment. Both changes are consistent with the direction of family law reform in comparable jurisdictions and with the evidence base on family violence that has accumulated since the original legislation was enacted.

Dispute resolution options

Litigation is the last resort in family law, not the first. The court system itself is designed on this basis — parties are required to make a genuine attempt to resolve their dispute before most applications can be filed, and the court’s case management processes are oriented toward settlement rather than trial. Understanding the full range of dispute resolution options available, and what each is suited to, is essential to managing a complex family law matter effectively.

Negotiation

Direct negotiation between lawyers, with or without their clients present, remains the most common pathway to resolution in complex property matters. In matters involving sophisticated parties and experienced legal advisers, well-structured negotiation — supported by accurate financial disclosure and reliable valuations — can produce outcomes that reflect the legal position without the cost and delay of formal proceedings. The key to effective negotiation is preparation: understanding the range of likely court outcomes well enough to assess whether a proposed settlement is reasonable.

Mediation

Mediation involves a neutral third party facilitating negotiation between the parties. In family law, attendance at family dispute resolution with an accredited family dispute resolution practitioner is generally a prerequisite to filing a parenting application in court, subject to exceptions for urgency, family violence, and certain other circumstances.

For property matters, mediation is not mandatorily required before filing, but it is routinely used as part of the pre-litigation process. In complex matters, a round-table conference involving the parties, their lawyers, and in some cases forensic accountants and other experts can be an effective forum for narrowing issues and reaching a settlement even in disputes that have appeared intractable.

Collaborative law

Collaborative law is a structured process in which both parties and their lawyers sign a formal participation agreement committing to resolve the matter without litigation. The process involves a series of four-way meetings and may include participation by financial neutrals, family consultants, and other specialists. The defining feature of the collaborative process — and the feature that gives it its discipline — is that if the process breaks down and either party proceeds to litigation, both collaborative lawyers must withdraw. The parties must then engage new lawyers for the court proceedings.

This structure creates a genuine commitment to resolving the issue among everyone in the room. It is particularly well-suited to matters where the parties have ongoing relationships — shared business interests, children, or extended family connections — that make a purely adversarial approach counterproductive. For high-net-worth clients who value privacy and want to maintain control over the process and its outcome, collaborative law offers advantages that litigation cannot.

Further reading: How collaborative law can help you avoid court and high costs →

Arbitration

Family law arbitration is available in Australia for property and financial matters under the Family Law Act. An arbitrator — typically a senior barrister or retired judge — is appointed by agreement to determine the dispute, and their award is then registered as a court order. Arbitration offers some of the advantages of litigation — a binding determination by an independent decision-maker — with greater flexibility over timing, venue, and process, and with greater confidentiality than court proceedings.

For complex property matters where the parties cannot reach an agreement but want a faster and more private determination than the court can offer, arbitration is an underused option that deserves consideration. It is not available for parenting matters.

The court process in complex matters

Where a family law dispute cannot be resolved through negotiation or alternative dispute resolution, proceedings in the FCFCOA follow a structured case management pathway. Understanding what that process involves — and how long it takes — is important for anyone considering litigation or already in it.

Commencing proceedings

Proceedings are commenced by filing an application in the FCFCOA. For property matters, the application sets out the orders sought and is accompanied by a financial statement disclosing the applicant’s financial position. For parenting matters, a certificate from a family dispute resolution practitioner is generally required, confirming that the parties have attended or attempted to attend family dispute resolution.

Once proceedings are filed, both parties are subject to the court’s jurisdiction and to its procedural rules, including the ongoing duty of disclosure. Non-compliance with procedural requirements — including disclosure obligations — can result in costs orders and other sanctions.

First court date and case assessment

The first court date is typically before a registrar rather than a judge. Its purpose is administrative — to confirm that the matter is properly constituted, to make directions for the exchange of documents and evidence, and to identify any urgent issues that need to be addressed immediately. In complex property matters, the first court date will usually result in directions for the preparation of financial disclosure documents, subpoenas to third parties, and in some cases orders for the appointment of a single expert valuator or for each party to obtain their own valuations.

Interim applications

Interim applications — for orders that are to operate while proceedings are on foot — are a significant feature of family law litigation. In property matters, interim applications may be made for injunctions to prevent the disposal of assets, for maintenance pending the final hearing, or for orders requiring a party to produce financial documents. In parenting matters, interim parenting orders are made at an early stage and operate until the final hearing or until a further order is made.

Interim hearings are not mini-trials. They are heard on the papers — affidavits and documents — without oral evidence in most cases. The standard for granting interim relief is whether there is a serious question to be tried and whether the balance of convenience favours the order being made.

Financial case assessment and conciliation

In property matters, the FCFCOA’s case management pathway includes a financial case assessment conference — a structured meeting before a registrar at which the parties and their lawyers discuss the issues in dispute, the valuations and financial evidence, and the prospects of settlement. Many matters settle at or around this stage, once the parties have a clear picture of the court’s likely approach and the cost of proceeding to a final hearing.

Final hearing

Where matters proceed to a final hearing, the parties and their witnesses give evidence on oath and are cross-examined. In complex property matters involving contested business valuations, expert witnesses, including forensic accountants and valuers, will be called. The final hearing in a genuinely complex matter may run for several days or longer.

After the hearing, the judge delivers judgment — which may take weeks or months in a complex matter — and makes final orders. The cost of reaching a final hearing in a complex property matter is substantial, and the outcome is uncertain. This is why experienced family lawyers focus relentlessly on achieving a negotiated outcome before the matter reaches that stage.

Realistic timelines

In complex property matters, parties should plan for a pre-proceedings and early litigation phase of six to twelve months from separation to a realistic negotiating position. Where matters settle at or around the financial case assessment conference, the total elapsed time from commencement of proceedings to resolution is typically twelve to twenty-four months. Where matters proceed to a final hearing, two to four years from commencement is a realistic expectation in genuinely contested complex matters.

These timelines are a significant consideration in the decision whether to litigate. The financial and personal cost of four years of contested family law litigation — even where the outcome is ultimately favourable — is rarely justified against a reasonable negotiated settlement reached much earlier.

Where parties reach an agreement — whether through negotiation, mediation, collaborative law, or at any point during litigation — that agreement needs to be given legal effect in a form that provides finality and is enforceable.

For property matters, the two main options are consent orders and binding financial agreements. Consent orders are made by the court on the terms agreed by the parties, without a contested hearing. They carry the authority of a court order and can only be varied or set aside in limited circumstances. Binding financial agreements — BFAs — are private contracts that do not require court approval but are subject to the grounds for setting aside discussed in the BFA hub page.

For parenting matters, parenting plans are private agreements between parents about parenting arrangements. They are not court orders and are not directly enforceable, but they can be registered as consent orders to give them that status. Where parenting arrangements need the certainty of a court order — including where there is a history of non-compliance — consent orders are the appropriate mechanism.

Speak with us in confidence

If you are considering commencing family law proceedings, or if you are already in proceedings and want a second view on strategy or prospects, we invite you to contact us for a confidential discussion. There is no obligation.

This page is intended as a general reference only and does not constitute legal advice. Family law outcomes are highly fact-specific. You should seek advice from a qualified family law solicitor in relation to your particular circumstances. Koffels Solicitors and Barristers, Level 23 Angel Place, 123 Pitt Street, Sydney NSW 2000.