For a long time, people who had been financially controlled during a relationship found that the law had very little to say about it once the property was divided. The money was counted. What had been done to get it, or to keep it out of one person’s hands, largely was not.
That has changed. Amendments to the Family Law Act now require the court to take the economic effects of family violence into account when working out who gets what.
Here is what that means in practice, what the court can actually do about it, and what to do if you are the one without access to the money.
What Financial Abuse Actually Looks Like
Financial abuse is often invisible from the outside, and many people living with it do not recognise the word applies to them. It rarely announces itself. It usually looks like an arrangement that made sense at the time and slowly stopped being one.
The Family Law Act definition of family violence expressly includes economic or financial abuse, with examples such as unreasonably denying someone financial autonomy or withholding financial support they reasonably need.
In practice it can include any of the following.
- Controlling all the accounts, so one person has no independent access to money.
- Putting all assets, loans or businesses in one name only.
- Preventing a partner from working, studying or building a career.
- Running up debt in a partner’s name, or coercing them into signing loans and guarantees.
- Withholding money for essentials, or requiring receipts and permission for ordinary spending.
- Hiding income, moving money, or being deliberately vague about what exists.
- Refusing to contribute financially while relying on the other person’s income.
None of these need to have involved physical violence or raised voices to be legally relevant.
The Law Changed On 10 June 2025
This is the most significant development in this area in years. Property settlement changes to the Family Law Act commenced on 10 June 2025, and they put family violence squarely into the property framework rather than leaving it as an argument at the edges.
What The Court Must Now Weigh
Two things matter most for anyone in this situation.
First, the court must consider the effect of family violence on a party’s ability to make contributions to the property and to the family. If being prevented from working, or being undermined at every turn, reduced what you were able to contribute, that is now something the court is directed to think about rather than something you have to squeeze into a general argument.
Second, the economic effect of family violence must be considered when the court looks at each person’s current and future circumstances. Damaged earning capacity, lost superannuation, debt taken on under pressure and the cost of rebuilding all sit here.
The guidance issued for family law professionals is explicit that these factors go to both property settlement and spousal maintenance.
Who The Changes Apply To
The changes apply to married couples and to de facto couples, with one important exception. De facto couples in Western Australia are dealt with under separate state legislation rather than the Family Law Act property regime.
They also apply to matters already in the system, not only to new applications, unless a final hearing had already started before the changes commenced. If your matter has been running for a while, this is worth raising with your lawyer.
How It Feeds Into The Split
Here is the part that is most often misunderstood, and it matters because expectations set now shape how the whole process feels.
Financial abuse is not a separate claim you bring, and it does not trigger a set percentage. Australian family law has no fixed formula and no automatic split. The court works through contributions and through each person’s current and future circumstances, and reaches a result that is just and equitable on the facts.
What the amendments do is make sure the economic reality of what happened is part of that assessment rather than invisible to it.
| What happened | Where it is likely to be relevant |
|---|---|
| You were prevented from working or studying | Contributions, and future earning capacity |
| Debt was run up in your name or forced on you | How liabilities are allocated between you |
| Your superannuation stalled while theirs grew | Contributions, and future circumstances |
| Money was gambled or deliberately burned through | Wastage, which is assessed separately |
| Assets were hidden or moved before separation | Disclosure, and potentially setting the transaction aside |
| You need to retrain or rebuild from nothing | Future circumstances, and spousal maintenance |
Wastage Is A Related But Separate Idea
Wastage often travels alongside financial abuse and it is worth understanding as its own concept.
Wastage is where one person has recklessly, negligently or deliberately dissipated assets that would otherwise have been available to divide. Gambling losses, spending on an affair, deliberately selling assets below value or letting a property fall apart can all raise it.
It is generally dealt with as part of the overall adjustment rather than by adding the money back as though it still existed. The practical point is that money burned through does not simply vanish from the conversation.
Proving It
This is where most of the real work happens, and where people are often surprised by how much the system is on their side.
The Duty Of Disclosure
Both parties have a duty of full and frank disclosure of their financial circumstances, and the 2024 amendments wrote that duty into the Family Law Act itself rather than leaving it only in the court rules. The obligation is ongoing and covers everything relevant, including things held through companies, trusts and third parties.
If you have been kept in the dark about the finances, this obligation is the tool that opens them up. You do not need to already know what exists in order to require them to tell you.
What Happens If They Hide Things
Non disclosure is treated seriously. A court can order costs against the person who withheld information, draw inferences against them about what they are hiding, refuse to let them rely on documents they did not produce, and in some circumstances set aside orders that were obtained without proper disclosure.
That last point matters. A settlement reached on the basis of a dishonest financial picture is not necessarily the end of the matter.
Where the value of what exists is itself in dispute, our note on valuations in family law property disputes covers how those figures get established, and our guide to financial disclosure obligations goes through what each side has to produce.
If Money Has Already Been Moved
Where assets have been transferred, sold or restructured to put them out of reach, there are specific tools available.
Section 106B of the Family Law Act allows a court to set aside or restrain a transaction that was made, or is proposed, to defeat an existing or anticipated property order. In other words, transferring the house to a relative or draining an account in anticipation of a settlement is not the clean escape people imagine it to be.
Urgent applications are possible where there is a real risk assets will disappear. Speed matters here, because it is far easier to stop a transaction than to unwind one.
The Practical Problem Of Having No Money To Fight With
There is a cruel logic to financial abuse that deserves naming, because it is the thing that stops many people acting.
The person who has been financially controlled is often asset rich on paper and has nothing at all in practice. They may not qualify for free legal help because of assets they cannot touch, while the other party funds themselves comfortably from money they control.
There are ways through this, and they are worth asking about specifically.
- Interim orders for funds. A court can release money from the pool before the final settlement so a party can meet legal costs and living expenses.
- Spousal maintenance. A separate obligation to support a former partner who cannot adequately support themselves.
- Deferred fee arrangements. Some firms will act on the basis of payment at settlement, and the terms of these arrangements vary considerably, so read them carefully.
- Speak to your bank. Ask what support is available for customers experiencing financial abuse, and about your access to any account you are a signatory on.
- Community legal centres and legal aid. Worth approaching even if you assume you will not qualify, since family violence can change how eligibility is assessed.
Not having cash today does not mean you have no claim. It means the sequence of steps needs to be planned properly.
Do Not Wait Too Long
Time limits apply and they are firm. Married couples generally have 12 months from the date a divorce order takes effect. De facto couples generally have 2 years from the end of the relationship.
Applying outside those periods requires the court’s permission, which is not guaranteed. If you are close to either limit, treat it as urgent.
If You Are Not Safe
Property can wait. Safety cannot.
If you are in immediate danger, call 000. For confidential counselling and support at any hour, 1800RESPECT is the national family violence and sexual assault service, on 1800 737 732.
Financial abuse frequently sits alongside other forms of controlling behaviour, and support services can help with safety planning as well as with the practical steps of separating finances.
What To Do Next
If any of this is familiar, the useful first step is a conversation about your specific circumstances rather than a general one about the law.
Our overview of separation sets out the sequence of decisions that follows, and our property settlements page explains how we approach dividing assets where the picture is contested or incomplete.
The government guidance on money and property after separation is also worth reading for a plain overview of the process.
The Short Version
- Economic and financial abuse is expressly recognised as family violence under the Family Law Act.
- Since 10 June 2025 the court must consider the economic effect of family violence in property settlements.
- It affects both what you were able to contribute and what your circumstances look like going forward.
- There is still no formula and no automatic percentage. It is a discretionary assessment on the evidence.
- Wastage of assets is a related but separate consideration.
- Full and frank disclosure is a legal duty, and hiding assets carries real consequences.
- Transactions designed to defeat a settlement can be set aside under section 106B.
- Having no access to cash does not mean you have no options, and interim orders exist for this reason.
- Time limits are 12 months after divorce, or 2 years after a de facto relationship ends.
The law now recognises something people in these relationships have always known, which is that control over money is its own kind of harm and it leaves a mark on what each person walks away with.
The above is general information about Australian family law and is not legal advice. Outcomes depend heavily on individual circumstances, and you should obtain advice about your own situation.