Skip to main content
Category

Mediation

Strata & Neighbour Disputes: Resolve Without Going to a Tribunal

By Alternate Dispute Resolution, Litigation, Mediation, Strata Law

More Australians live in apartments, townhouses, and strata schemes than ever before. In Sydney, Melbourne, and Brisbane especially, high-density living is now the dominant form of new housing. With it comes a specific set of challenges: shared walls, shared amenities, shared decision-making — and, inevitably, conflict.

Strata and neighbour disputes cover a wide range of issues: excessive noise, unpaid levies, unapproved renovations, disagreements over pets or parking, disputes about who is responsible for common property maintenance, and neighbour-to-neighbour tensions that simmer over months before boiling over.

When these disputes aren’t resolved early, they can escalate — to formal complaints, tribunal applications, and in extreme cases, court proceedings. The tribunals that handle strata matters (NCAT in NSW, VCAT in Victoria, and QCAT in Queensland) are significantly backlogged. Cases can take many months to reach hearing. Parties who were neighbours before the dispute — and will remain neighbours regardless of the outcome — are forced to live through months of adversarial process before any resolution is reached.

Mediation offers a smarter alternative.


The Legal Framework: It Differs by State

Strata law in Australia is state-based, and the relevant legislation — and the mandatory dispute resolution steps — differs significantly across jurisdictions.

New South Wales: Strata Schemes Management Act 2015

The Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW) is the primary legislation governing strata schemes in NSW. It sets out the obligations of owners corporations, the rights of lot owners, and the processes for managing disputes.

In NSW, mediation with NSW Fair Trading is a mandatory prerequisite for most strata dispute applications to NCAT. You generally cannot go straight to the tribunal — you must first apply to NSW Fair Trading for mediation. Fair Trading will attempt to resolve the dispute through mediation, and if mediation fails, it issues a certificate that must be lodged with any subsequent NCAT application.

There are limited exceptions where a party can apply directly to NCAT without first attempting mediation — primarily in urgent matters or where the dispute involves certain types of by-law enforcement orders. But for the vast majority of strata disputes, mediation comes first.

NSW Fair Trading provides detailed guidance on strata dispute processes at fairtrading.nsw.gov.au.

Victoria: Owners Corporations Act 2006

The Owners Corporations Act 2006 (Vic) governs owners corporations in Victoria, including their obligations to manage and maintain common property, levy fees, and enforce rules.

Consumer Affairs Victoria provides dispute resolution services for owners corporation disputes, and mediation is available through Consumer Affairs or via private mediators. While mediation is not always mandatory before a VCAT application in Victoria, VCAT actively encourages parties to attempt resolution before filing, and may take into account whether a party has genuinely attempted mediation when making orders about costs.

Queensland: Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997

The Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (Qld) establishes the body corporate framework in Queensland. The Office of the Commissioner for Body Corporate and Community Management (the Commissioner’s office) provides a conciliation service that is a mandatory first step before most adjudication applications.

Parties to a Queensland body corporate dispute must first apply to the Commissioner’s office for conciliation. If conciliation fails, the Commissioner’s office will issue a referral that allows the matter to proceed to adjudication — either within the Commissioner’s office or through QCAT.

The Commissioner’s office website and QCAT provide detailed guidance on the body corporate dispute process.

Other States and Territories

Similar frameworks operate across South Australia, Western Australia, Tasmania, the ACT, and the Northern Territory. In each case, there are mandatory or strongly encouraged mediation steps before tribunal applications are made. The relevant bodies include Consumer and Business Services (SA), the Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety (WA), and Consumer Affairs in each remaining jurisdiction.


Common Strata and Neighbour Disputes

Noise

Noise is the single most common strata dispute in Australia. Music, television, footsteps on hard floors, dogs, late-night gatherings, gym equipment — what feels entirely normal to one resident can be genuinely intolerable to another. Noise disputes are often compounded by poor building acoustics, particularly in apartment buildings constructed before modern acoustic standards were introduced.

Mediation allows the parties to discuss the issue directly in a structured, safe environment. Most noise disputes are not really about the noise itself — they are about feeling heard and respected by a neighbour. A mediator can help parties reach practical agreements: agreeing on quiet hours, installing floor coverings, relocating gym equipment, or establishing direct communication protocols for when noise becomes a problem.

Unpaid Levies

When a lot owner falls behind on strata levies — the regular fees that fund common property maintenance, building insurance, and administrative costs — the owners corporation is left to cover shared expenses from a reduced pool. This creates genuine financial pressure and can affect the maintenance of shared facilities.

Owners corporations can pursue unpaid levies through debt recovery mechanisms, but this is slow and adversarial. Mediation can help reach a structured repayment plan that recovers the debt without the cost and delay of formal proceedings.

Unapproved Renovations and Alterations

Renovations that affect common property, structural elements, or the appearance of the scheme typically require approval from the owners corporation. Unapproved works — a bathroom renovation that removes load-bearing tiles, a balcony enclosure without consent, a kitchen that affects waterproofing — are a frequent source of dispute.

These disputes often involve technical questions about the extent of damage and the cost of remediation, but the underlying conflict is usually about process — a failure of communication before the works began. Mediation can help parties reach practical agreements about what remediation (if any) is required and how costs will be allocated.

Pets

Most strata by-laws now accommodate pets subject to conditions, following legislative changes in NSW (2021) and similar developments in other states that restricted absolute pet bans. But disputes over specific animals persist — particularly dogs that bark, cats that access common areas, or situations where a by-law permits pets in principle but the owners corporation disputes whether a particular animal satisfies the conditions.

Mediation allows the parties to discuss the practical issues and reach an agreement — for example, agreeing on specific conditions for the pet’s presence in the scheme — without resorting to formal by-law enforcement proceedings.

Parking

Parking disputes range from lot owners encroaching on common property parking spaces to disagreements about visitor parking, accessible parking allocation, and the use of garages. In buildings where parking is genuinely scarce, these disputes can become deeply adversarial.

Common Property Maintenance and Repair

Who is responsible for maintaining and repairing specific parts of a strata scheme? The distinction between lot property and common property is not always obvious — windows, balconies, waterproofing membranes, and boundary walls can fall on either side depending on the scheme’s registered plan and the applicable legislation.

Disputes about responsibility for costly repairs (particularly water ingress and structural issues) are among the most financially significant strata disputes. Mediation provides a forum to resolve questions of responsibility and cost-sharing without the delay and expense of formal proceedings.

Levies and Special Levies

When an owners corporation proposes a special levy — a one-off charge to fund a significant repair or capital expenditure — disputes can arise about whether the work is necessary, whether the cost is reasonable, or whether some lot owners should contribute more than others. These disputes go to the heart of how strata schemes are governed and funded.


Neighbour Disputes Beyond Strata

Not all neighbour disputes involve strata schemes. Freestanding properties give rise to their own category of conflicts.

Fences

Disputes about the construction, maintenance, and cost of dividing fences are governed by the Dividing Fences Acts in each state. In NSW, the Dividing Fences Act 1991 (NSW) requires neighbours to share the cost of a sufficient dividing fence. Disputes about what “sufficient” means, and how costs should be shared, are common — and well-suited to mediation. NSW Fair Trading provides guidance on dividing fences disputes at fairtrading.nsw.gov.au.

Trees and Encroachments

Trees that overhang or encroach on neighbouring properties — dropping leaves into pools, lifting paving, or creating safety risks — are another frequent source of neighbour conflict. In NSW, the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 (NSW) gives the Land and Environment Court jurisdiction over tree disputes. But many of these disputes can be resolved through mediation before formal proceedings are required.

Boundary encroachments — fences built on the wrong side of the boundary, structures that cross the boundary line — are governed by the Encroachment of Buildings Act in some states. Mediation can help parties reach practical resolution, including agreements about easements, adjustments, or compensation.

General Neighbourhood Conflict

Beyond the specific dispute types, many neighbours simply have a breakdown in the relationship — accumulated slights, perceived disrespect, or a fundamental incompatibility of lifestyle. Community Justice Centres in NSW provide free mediation for neighbour disputes at cjc.nsw.gov.au. Similar services exist through Dispute Settlement Centres in Victoria at disputes.vic.gov.au.


Why Mediation Makes Particular Sense in Strata Disputes

You Still Have to Live There

Unlike most commercial disputes, strata and neighbour disputes involve people who will continue to share a building, a car park, and a lift lobby regardless of how the dispute resolves. Adversarial proceedings tend to entrench animosity. Mediation, by contrast, creates space for parties to reach agreements they both have some investment in — which makes those agreements more likely to be honoured.

Tribunals Are Slow

NCAT, VCAT, and QCAT are under significant pressure. Wait times for hearing dates can stretch to many months. During that time, the underlying dispute continues, and the relationship between neighbours deteriorates further.

The Issues Are Often Practical, Not Legal

Many strata disputes are not really about legal rights — they are about communication breakdown, unmet expectations, and accumulated frustration. A mediator can work at that level in a way that a tribunal simply cannot.

For general guidance on what mediation involves and whether it is right for your situation, visit our mediation services page, or read more about how long mediation takes and costs of mediation.


How the Mediation Process Works in Strata Disputes

Whether you are a lot owner, a member of an owners corporation committee, a strata manager, or a neighbour in dispute, the mediation process follows a broadly similar structure.

Before the Session

The mediator will typically contact both parties before the session to explain the process, gather a brief summary of each party’s position, and ensure that the relevant people are available and authorised to participate. In strata disputes involving an owners corporation, it is important that the representative who attends has authority to agree to a resolution on behalf of the corporation — this may require a committee resolution before the session.

If you are required to provide a mediation certificate before applying to NCAT, VCAT, or QCAT, the mediating body will manage this process for you. In NSW, an application to NSW Fair Trading for mediation will be acknowledged and a session scheduled — typically within several weeks.

At the Session

Mediation sessions for strata and neighbour disputes typically last between two and four hours, though more complex matters may take longer. The mediator will facilitate the discussion, ensure both parties have an opportunity to be heard, and help the parties explore practical solutions.

Many strata disputes are resolved at a single mediation session. Outcomes might include:

  • An agreed set of quiet hours for noise-sensitive activities
  • A repayment schedule for outstanding levies
  • An agreed scope of make-good work for unapproved renovations
  • Agreed conditions for keeping a pet on the premises
  • A communication protocol between neighbours who have historically struggled to interact constructively

After the Session

If the parties reach agreement, the mediator will assist in documenting the terms — typically as a written agreement signed by both parties. This agreement is binding on the parties, though enforcement may require an application to the relevant tribunal if one party later fails to comply.

If mediation is unsuccessful, the mediating body will issue a certificate confirming that mediation was attempted, which is required before lodging a tribunal application in most jurisdictions.


Tips for Strata Disputes: Getting the Most from Mediation

Know your by-laws. Before attending mediation, obtain a copy of the strata scheme’s by-laws and any relevant committee decisions. Understanding what the rules actually say — rather than what you believe they say — gives you a much clearer basis for discussion.

Document the issue. Keep records of the dispute: dates, times, the nature of the problem, and any communications with the other party or the owners corporation. This documentation is useful in mediation and essential if the matter proceeds to a tribunal.

Focus on the practical outcome, not the principle. Many strata disputes become entrenched because one or both parties are more invested in being right than in reaching a workable solution. The most productive mediations focus on what each party actually needs going forward — not on who was wrong in the past.

Consider involving the strata manager. In complex disputes involving the owners corporation, the strata manager may be an appropriate person to include in the mediation. They often have context that individual lot owners do not, and their involvement can help ensure that any agreed solution is actually implemented.

Be prepared to continue living nearby. Unlike commercial disputes, strata and neighbour disputes are resolved in a context where the parties will continue to share space. Agreements that acknowledge this — that build in communication protocols and mutual respect — are more durable than those that focus solely on legal compliance.


Before You File a Tribunal Application

If you are considering a NCAT, VCAT, or QCAT application, check the mandatory dispute resolution requirements first. In most cases, you will be required to demonstrate that you have attempted mediation — or at least made genuine efforts to resolve the dispute directly. Filing without doing so can result in your application being dismissed or adjourned, adding further delay.

Accredited mediation through Mediations Australia satisfies these requirements and can be arranged quickly.


Don’t Wait for the Tribunal

Mediations Australia helps residents, lot owners, and owners corporations resolve strata and neighbour disputes efficiently — before they reach NCAT, VCAT, or QCAT.

Book a consultation and find out how we can help.


This article is general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Strata law in Australia is state and territory-based. The procedures, timelines, and mandatory steps vary significantly between jurisdictions. You should seek independent legal advice and review the specific legislation applicable in your state or territory.

Estate & Inheritance Disputes: Resolve Them Without Destroying Your Family

By Alternate Dispute Resolution, Estate Dispute Mediation, Estate Litigation, Mediation

The death of a parent, sibling, or spouse is one of the most difficult experiences a family can face. When a dispute emerges over how an estate is to be distributed — or whether a will is valid at all — grief can quickly transform into something harder and colder: litigation.

Estate and inheritance disputes are on the rise in Australia. An ageing population, rising property values, blended families, and increasingly complex financial arrangements (including superannuation and self-managed super funds) are creating more contested estates than any previous generation has seen.

The cost of that conflict — financially, emotionally, and in terms of family relationships — is real and lasting. Courts take years. Legal fees can consume a significant portion of the estate being fought over. And by the time a matter reaches judgment, the family relationships it was fought over are often beyond repair.

Mediation offers a better way.


Types of Estate Disputes

Estate disputes in Australia typically fall into several categories:

Contested Wills

A will can be contested on the grounds that it was not validly executed, that the testator lacked testamentary capacity at the time it was made, that the testator was subject to undue influence, or that the document itself does not accurately reflect the testator’s intentions. These claims are governed by succession legislation in each state and territory.

Family Provision Claims

Every Australian state and territory has legislation allowing eligible persons to apply to a court for provision (or additional provision) from an estate if they have not been adequately provided for. The relevant legislation includes:

  • Succession Act 2006 (NSW)
  • Succession Act 1981 (QLD)
  • Administration and Probate Act 1958 (VIC) and Wills Act 1997 (VIC)
  • Inheritance (Family Provision) Act 1972 (SA)
  • Family Provision Act 1972 (WA)
  • Testator’s Family Maintenance Act 1912 (TAS)
  • Family Provision Act 2004 (ACT)
  • Administration and Probate Act 1969 (NT)

Eligible applicants generally include spouses, de facto partners, children (including adult children), and in some jurisdictions, other dependants. The court assesses what “adequate provision” looks like having regard to the applicant’s financial circumstances and the relationship with the deceased. Full text of relevant legislation is available at legislation.gov.au and through AustLII.

Superannuation Death Benefit Disputes

Superannuation does not automatically form part of a deceased’s estate. The trustee of the super fund has discretion to pay the death benefit to an eligible dependant or the estate, unless a binding death benefit nomination is in place. Where a nomination is absent, invalid, or disputed, conflicts between family members can be significant — particularly where the super balance is substantial.

Executor Disputes

Disputes can also arise over the conduct of an executor — allegations of delay, mismanagement of estate assets, failure to account, or self-dealing. These matters can be brought before the relevant state Supreme Court but are well-suited to mediation where the parties’ underlying interests are better served by resolution than by formal removal proceedings.


Family Provision Claims: A State-by-State Overview

Family provision claims are the most common form of estate litigation in Australia, and the law differs meaningfully across jurisdictions.

New South Wales

Under the Succession Act 2006 (NSW), eligible persons can apply for a family provision order from the estate of a deceased person. Eligibility extends broadly — including spouses, de facto partners, children, former spouses, and persons who were wholly or partly dependent on the deceased. The application must be made within 12 months of the date of death, though courts have discretion to extend this timeframe. The NSW Supreme Court has a well-established practice of referring family provision matters to mediation before they are set down for hearing. Many matters settle at mediation.

Queensland

The Succession Act 1981 (Qld) governs family provision claims in Queensland. Eligible applicants include the spouse, children, and dependants of the deceased. Claims must generally be made within nine months of the date of death. The Supreme Court of Queensland actively encourages mediation in estate matters.

Victoria

In Victoria, family provision claims are made under the Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Vic). Victoria has a broader eligibility framework than some other states — a stepchild or registered caring partner may also be eligible in some circumstances. Claims are heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria, which routinely refers contested estate matters to mediation.

South Australia, Western Australia, and Other States

Each remaining state and territory has its own legislative framework and time limits. The common thread is that family provision claims are expensive, emotionally draining, and often resolved through mediation before reaching trial — because both parties eventually recognise that the cost of litigating to judgment is rarely worth it.

The AustLII database is a useful resource for accessing the relevant legislation in each state and territory.


Superannuation Death Benefits: A Growing Source of Conflict

Superannuation is now one of the largest assets many Australians hold. For many families, the super death benefit is larger than the entire probate estate. Yet it is not governed by the same rules as estate distribution.

When a person dies, their superannuation does not automatically pass to their estate. The trustee of the superannuation fund has legal discretion to pay the death benefit to an eligible dependant (a spouse, child, or financial dependant) or to the legal personal representative of the estate — unless a valid binding death benefit nomination (BDBN) is in place.

Where a BDBN exists and is valid, the trustee must follow it. But BDBNs can be challenged on the grounds of:

  • Failure to comply with the formal requirements (including witnessing requirements)
  • Mental incapacity at the time of signing
  • Fraud or undue influence
  • The nomination having lapsed

Where there is no valid BDBN, the trustee exercises discretion — and that discretion can be challenged if beneficiaries believe it was exercised improperly. Disputes between family members about the proper recipient of a death benefit are increasingly common, particularly in blended family situations where the deceased had children from a prior relationship as well as a current spouse.

These disputes are heard by the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) in the first instance, or by the courts. But they are also amenable to mediation — particularly where the dispute is about the distribution of a fixed pool of assets rather than a matter of legal principle.


Executor Disputes: When the Person in Charge Is Part of the Problem

The executor of an estate has significant legal responsibilities — to gather and protect assets, pay debts, and distribute the estate in accordance with the will. When an executor is also a beneficiary (which is common), conflicts of interest can arise.

Common executor disputes include:

  • Delay in administration — beneficiaries becoming frustrated with slow progress and alleging the executor is mismanaging the process
  • Failure to account — failure to provide clear accounts of assets, income, and expenses to beneficiaries
  • Self-dealing — allegations that the executor has used estate assets for their own benefit, or has acquired estate property at below-market value
  • Disagreements about asset sales — particularly where the estate includes a family home or business that some beneficiaries want retained and others want sold

The remedy for executor misconduct is an application to the relevant state Supreme Court for the executor to be removed and replaced. This is an expensive and adversarial process — and one that can often be avoided through mediation, where the executor and beneficiaries can reach agreement on timelines, information sharing, and distribution without needing a court order.


What Can and Cannot Be Mediated in an Estate Dispute?

Mediation is appropriate for most estate disputes, but there are some limitations.

Well-suited to mediation:
– Family provision claims — determining appropriate provision and its form (lump sum, right to reside, specific asset)
– Executor conduct disputes — agreeing on timelines, accounts, and distribution
– Disputes about the interpretation of will terms
– Superannuation death benefit disputes (once formal processes have been engaged)
– Disputes between beneficiaries about how assets should be distributed or liquidated

Less suitable for mediation:
– Challenges to the validity of a will on grounds of fraud or serious undue influence — these often require court intervention and may involve criminal conduct
– Disputes involving a party who lacks mental capacity to participate meaningfully
– Situations where urgent court orders are needed to protect estate assets from dissipation

Even in these more complex situations, mediation can play a role alongside, rather than instead of, legal proceedings — for example, in narrowing the issues for court after urgent protective orders have been obtained.


The Cost of Contesting a Will vs Mediation

The financial case for estate mediation is compelling. Consider the realistic costs:

Pathway Approximate Cost (indicative) Timeframe
Mediation $3,000–$10,000 (shared) 1–2 sessions; weeks
Solicitor-negotiated settlement $10,000–$30,000+ per party Months
Family provision trial (Supreme Court) $50,000–$200,000+ per party 1–3 years

These are indicative ranges only. Costs vary significantly depending on complexity, legal representation, and jurisdiction.

In estates where the disputed amount is less than $200,000, the cost of Supreme Court litigation can easily exceed the value of the claim. Even in larger estates, the financial and emotional cost of years of litigation must be weighed against the prospect of a mediated outcome that may be less than “full victory” but achieves certainty and resolution.

Legal aid is available in some circumstances — Legal Aid commissions in each state may be able to assist eligible applicants. For general information about costs, see our article on the costs of mediation and mediation — who pays?.


Why Litigation Is So Destructive in Estate Disputes

Estate litigation is qualitatively different from commercial litigation. The parties are family members. They may have decades of shared history, unresolved grievances, and deeply personal stakes. The legal system is not well-equipped to navigate this complexity — it can determine legal entitlements, but it cannot repair damaged relationships or honour the informal wishes of someone who has passed.

The Supreme Courts in most Australian states now actively encourage — and in some cases, require — that estate disputes be referred to mediation before being set down for trial. Many family provision matters settle at mediation, often on terms that the parties themselves design.

The Australian Government Attorney-General’s Department has recognised alternative dispute resolution as a priority for reducing the burden on the court system, particularly in family and estate matters.

For a broader view of why avoiding litigation is often the right call, see why going to court for your dispute is a mistake.


How Mediation Works for Estate Disputes

Estate mediation typically involves:

  • Preparation — each party, usually assisted by their solicitor, prepares a brief summary of their position and key documents (the will, asset valuations, evidence of relationship, financial circumstances)
  • Separate pre-mediation consultations — the mediator meets privately with each party before the joint session to understand their interests and concerns
  • Joint session — the mediator facilitates a structured discussion; parties are encouraged to speak to their experiences, not just their legal positions
  • Private caucuses — the mediator works between parties to test proposals and bridge gaps
  • Settlement agreement — if resolved, a binding agreement is drafted, often to be formalised as consent orders or a deed of family arrangement

Importantly, family members who are not named in the will but have a genuine stake in the outcome can be included in the mediation. This is something the court process rarely accommodates.

You can read more about the estate dispute mediation process specifically, or explore our broader family mediation services.


Is Mediation Right for Your Estate Dispute?

Mediation is appropriate for most estate disputes, including contested will claims, family provision applications, superannuation death benefit disputes, and executor conduct disputes. It is less likely to be suitable where:

  • There are allegations of serious fraud or elder abuse requiring immediate court intervention
  • A party lacks legal capacity to participate meaningfully
  • One party is unrepresented and there is a significant power imbalance that cannot be managed by the mediator
  • Urgent court orders are needed to protect estate assets from dissipation

In those circumstances, it remains important to obtain legal advice promptly.


Practical Tips for Estate Mediation

Get legal advice first

While you do not need a lawyer present at mediation (though many parties choose to bring one), it is strongly recommended that you obtain independent legal advice before the session. Understanding your legal rights — including whether you have a viable family provision claim, what time limits apply, and what a court might realistically award — gives you a realistic basis for negotiation.

Many solicitors who practise in estate law are experienced in mediation and can help you prepare a position paper that clearly articulates your claim and the basis for it.

Gather financial information

Estate mediation is most productive when both parties have a clear picture of the estate’s assets and liabilities. Before the session, you should have access to:

  • A copy of the will and any earlier wills
  • A schedule of estate assets and their estimated values (including real property, investments, bank accounts, and personal property)
  • Information about any superannuation and whether a binding death benefit nomination exists
  • Details of the deceased’s financial position at the date of death, including any debts

If the executor has not provided this information, you may need to request it formally — and if it is not forthcoming, this itself may be grounds for a complaint or application to the court.

Think about what you actually need

Many family provision claims are driven by genuine financial need — a child who was financially dependent on the deceased, or who contributed to the care of the deceased in their final years, may have a real claim to provision. But some claims are driven more by hurt feelings, family grievances, or a sense of injustice about how the estate was structured.

In mediation, being clear about what you genuinely need — and why — opens up a wider range of possible outcomes. A court can only award money or specific assets. A mediated outcome might also include an apology, a recognition of contribution, a transfer of a specific item of sentimental value, or other non-financial elements that the court could never order.

Be ready to hear the other side’s perspective

Estate disputes are often the culmination of a lifetime of family dynamics. Mediation creates space for those dynamics to be acknowledged — not to relitigate the past, but to understand each other’s perspective well enough to reach a resolution both parties can accept. This is often where the real work of estate mediation happens.

For more information on how estate mediation works, see our dedicated estate dispute mediation page, or explore our broader family mediation services.


Take the First Step

Estate disputes don’t need to destroy what a person spent a lifetime building — including their family. Mediations Australia works with families navigating some of the most difficult conversations they’ll ever have.

Book a consultation to find out how mediation can help your family reach a resolution that honours everyone’s interests.


This article is general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Estate law in Australia is state and territory-based and the applicable legislation will depend on where the deceased was domiciled. Superannuation law is federal. You should seek independent legal advice from a qualified Australian solicitor in relation to any estate dispute.

The Right to Disconnect: Resolving Disputes Under Australia’s New Laws

By Alternate Dispute Resolution, Employment Law, Mediation, Workplace Mediation

From 26 August 2024, employees at large Australian businesses gained a legal right to refuse to monitor, read, or respond to contact from their employer outside of work hours — unless that refusal is unreasonable. From 26 August 2025, the same right extended to employees at small businesses.

This change, introduced through amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), represents one of the most significant shifts in Australian workplace law in recent years. It recognises what many employees have long experienced: the boundary between work and personal life has blurred, and that blurring has real costs to health, wellbeing, and productivity.

But the right to disconnect isn’t a blanket prohibition on after-hours contact. And when employers and employees disagree about whether a refusal was reasonable — or whether contact crossed the line — there is a formal dispute resolution process to follow. Mediation sits at the heart of that process.


What the Right to Disconnect Actually Means

Under the amendments to the Fair Work Act, an employee may refuse to:

  • Monitor work-related communications (emails, calls, messages) outside their ordinary working hours
  • Read such communications outside their ordinary working hours
  • Respond to those communications outside their ordinary working hours

This applies unless the refusal is “unreasonable.” The Fair Work Act identifies several factors that are relevant to determining whether a refusal is unreasonable, including:

  • The reason for the contact
  • The nature of the employee’s role and their level of responsibility
  • Whether the employee is compensated for being available or for working additional hours
  • The impact of the contact or the refusal on the employer or other parties
  • Personal circumstances of the employee (including family or caring responsibilities)

Importantly, the right does not prevent employers from making contact — it gives employees the right to refuse to respond. The Fair Work Ombudsman has published guidance on how the right applies in practice.


What Counts as “Unreasonable” Refusal?

This is the critical question that drives most right to disconnect disputes — and the one where context matters most. There is no definitive list of what constitutes an unreasonable refusal. The assessment is contextual and will be made by the Fair Work Commission (FWC) on a case-by-case basis.

However, the Fair Work Act provides a framework. The following factors are relevant to determining whether a refusal to respond is unreasonable:

The reason for the contact. If the employer is contacting an employee because of a genuine emergency — a data breach, a safety incident, a critical client escalation — refusing to respond may be unreasonable. Routine follow-up on a non-urgent matter at 10pm on a Sunday is a different situation entirely.

The nature of the role. Senior managers, executives, and those in roles with inherent on-call expectations — such as IT operations, emergency services contractors, or hospital administrators — are in a different position from frontline staff or junior employees. The FWC will consider whether after-hours availability is a genuine and understood part of the role.

Compensation for availability. If an employee receives an allowance, higher base salary, or other remuneration specifically to compensate for after-hours availability, this weighs in favour of a refusal being unreasonable. Conversely, if no such compensation is provided, the expectation of after-hours response becomes harder to justify.

The method and urgency of contact. A phone call at midnight from a direct manager differs from a non-urgent Slack message. The FWC will consider whether the method and timing of contact was proportionate to the urgency of the matter.

The employee’s personal circumstances. Caring responsibilities, health conditions, and other personal factors are explicitly included in the assessment framework. An employee with young children or a health condition that requires rest may have stronger grounds for declining after-hours contact.

The size and operational context of the business. A small business with fewer resources and fewer staff may have a more legitimate claim that certain employees need to be contactable outside hours than a large organisation with a substantial workforce.

Safe Work Australia provides guidance on the psychosocial risks of always-on work culture at safeworkaustralia.gov.au. These risks — including burnout, anxiety, and impaired recovery — are part of the broader work health and safety context in which right to disconnect disputes arise.


Small Business vs Large Business: Key Differences

The right to disconnect applied to large business employees from 26 August 2024, and was extended to small business employees from 26 August 2025. Under the Fair Work Act, a “small business employer” is one with fewer than 15 employees.

There is no substantive difference in the right itself — it applies equally regardless of employer size. However, the practical application differs in several ways:

Operational dependency. In a small business, individual employees often carry more operational responsibility and may be genuinely harder to replace in an emergency. The FWC is likely to take this into account when assessing whether a refusal was unreasonable in a small business context.

Policy sophistication. Large businesses typically have more formal HR policies, employment contracts, and communication protocols. Small businesses may be operating with minimal documentation, which can create ambiguity about what after-hours expectations actually exist.

Dispute resolution capacity. A large business will generally have an internal HR team or EAP to assist with disputes before they reach the FWC. Small business owners may be dealing directly with their employees without that support infrastructure — making early access to mediation particularly valuable.

Cost sensitivity. The cost of FWC proceedings — even as a respondent — can be disproportionate for a small business. Resolving a right to disconnect dispute through workplace mediation is significantly cheaper and faster.


FWC Stop Orders and Civil Penalties

If a right to disconnect dispute cannot be resolved at the workplace level and is referred to the Fair Work Commission, the Commission has the power to make orders.

Stop orders

The FWC can make a stop order directed at either party:

  • An order requiring an employee to stop unreasonably refusing contact from the employer
  • An order requiring an employer to stop taking adverse action against an employee for exercising their right to disconnect

Stop orders are enforceable. Contravening a stop order without a reasonable excuse is a civil penalty provision — meaning the party in breach can face significant financial penalties.

Civil penalties

As of the time of writing, the civil penalty for a contravention of an FWC stop order can be substantial — the maximum penalties for individuals and corporations under the Fair Work Act are significant and should not be underestimated. Visit fairwork.gov.au or fwc.gov.au for current penalty amounts.

Adverse action protection

An employee who exercises their right to disconnect is protected from adverse action by their employer. If an employer takes action — including dismissal, demotion, reduction in hours, or change of duties — that is causally connected to an employee’s exercise of their right to disconnect, the employer may face an adverse action claim under the general protections provisions of the Fair Work Act.

This protection is significant. It means that simply complying with the law and refusing to respond to after-hours contact should not put an employee’s job at risk.


Employer Obligations: Policy and Practical Steps

The right to disconnect creates practical obligations for employers beyond mere compliance. Businesses should be proactively addressing this in their policies and management practices.

Update your policies

Employment contracts, workplace policies, and enterprise agreements should be reviewed to ensure they do not contain terms that are inconsistent with the right to disconnect. Policies that create an implicit obligation to respond to after-hours contact — or that describe after-hours responsiveness as a performance expectation — may need to be updated.

Clarify legitimate expectations

Businesses should clearly document which roles carry genuine after-hours expectations and the basis for those expectations (including any additional compensation). This provides clarity for both employees and managers and reduces the risk of disputes arising from ambiguity.

Train managers

Managers need to understand the right to disconnect and what it means practically. Many disputes in this area arise because managers are not aware of the legal position — they assume that sending a message outside hours is inherently acceptable and that employees are obliged to respond. Training on what the right means, and how to communicate expectations in a legally compliant way, reduces the risk of inadvertent breaches.

Establish internal pathways

Businesses should have a clear internal pathway for employees to raise concerns about after-hours contact — including access to HR, an employee assistance program, or a workplace mediator — before disputes escalate to the FWC.


Who Is Covered?

The right applies to all employees covered by the national workplace relations system under the Fair Work Act. This includes most private sector employees in Australia. There are some exceptions and nuances — for example, the right interacts with enterprise agreements and modern awards, some of which may contain specific provisions about after-hours contact and availability.

For current and detailed information on coverage, visit fairwork.gov.au or the Fair Work Commission.


How Disputes Must Be Resolved

When a dispute arises — for example, an employer believes an employee’s refusal was unreasonable, or an employee believes they are being pressured to respond despite exercising their right — the Act prescribes a process:

Step 1: Resolve it in the workplace first

The primary obligation is to resolve the dispute at the workplace level. This means genuine discussion between the employee and their manager, and where appropriate, involvement of HR or a workplace mediator. Many disputes at this stage are resolved informally.

This is where workplace mediation becomes particularly valuable. A skilled, neutral mediator can help both parties articulate their concerns, understand each other’s perspective, and reach a practical agreement — without the dispute escalating.

Step 2: Refer to the Fair Work Commission

If the dispute cannot be resolved at the workplace level, either party may apply to the Fair Work Commission for assistance. The Commission has powers to deal with the dispute through mediation, conciliation, or — if necessary — making orders.

The Commission can make orders to stop an employee from unreasonably refusing contact, or to stop an employer from taking adverse action against an employee who exercised their right. Contravening such orders can result in significant civil penalties.

It is worth noting that the Commission’s preference is also for parties to attempt resolution before formal orders are made. Mediation remains the expected first step even within the Commission’s process.


Practical Steps for Employees Before Mediation

If you are an employee who believes your right to disconnect is not being respected:

  1. Keep records. Document the after-hours contact — save emails, messages, and call logs with dates and times. Note whether the contact was urgent, what was requested, and whether you responded.
  2. Check your award or agreement. Your modern award or enterprise agreement may contain specific provisions about after-hours contact and availability. Understanding these gives you a clearer picture of your rights.
  3. Raise it internally first. Before escalating, consider raising your concern with your manager or HR. A calm conversation that cites the Fair Work Act and explains your position is often effective — many managers are simply unaware of the new obligations.
  4. Seek advice. If internal discussion doesn’t resolve the issue, consider contacting the Fair Work Ombudsman or accessing free advice through a community legal centre at lawaccess.gov.au (NSW) or the Law Access service in your state.
  5. Request mediation. Workplace mediation offers a confidential, cost-effective path to resolution before an FWC application becomes necessary.

Practical Steps for Employers Before Mediation

If you are an employer managing a right to disconnect dispute:

  1. Don’t dismiss the concern. An employee raising a right to disconnect issue is exercising a legal right. Dismissing or penalising them creates serious legal risk.
  2. Review the contact pattern. Honestly assess whether after-hours contact expectations in your business are reasonable and proportionate to the role and its compensation.
  3. Consider your obligations. Under work health and safety law, you have an obligation to manage psychosocial hazards — including unreasonable work demands. The right to disconnect intersects with these obligations.
  4. Engage mediation early. Workplace mediation can resolve a right to disconnect dispute quickly and confidentially — without the cost and disruption of an FWC application.

Why Mediation Matters Here

The right to disconnect sits in an inherently human context. It is not just about legal compliance — it is about how people are treated at work and how workplace cultures are shaped. Disputes in this area can quickly become personal, damaging relationships between employees and managers that may otherwise be functional and productive.

Workplace mediation is specifically designed to address this. It creates space for both parties to be heard, helps clarify what each side actually needs (as distinct from their stated positions), and produces agreements that both parties have some ownership over. That tends to produce better outcomes — and more durable ones — than those imposed by a tribunal or court.

You can learn more about what to expect from the mediation process in our guide on preparing for mediation.

For more on the role of the Fair Work system in workplace disputes, see our article on the role of Fair Work Australia and workplace mediation.


Resolve Your Workplace Dispute Before It Escalates

Whether you’re an employee who feels their right to disconnect is not being respected, or an employer managing an after-hours contact dispute, Mediations Australia can help.

Our accredited workplace mediators work with both parties to reach practical, fair outcomes — before the Fair Work Commission gets involved.

Book a consultation today.


This article is general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Workplace relations law in Australia is complex and the application of the right to disconnect will depend on individual circumstances, applicable awards or agreements, and the specific facts of each case. You should seek independent legal advice if you are involved in a workplace dispute.

Who Gets the Dog How Mediation Resolves Pet Disputes After Separation

Who Gets the Dog? How Mediation Resolves Pet Disputes After Separation

By Mediation

Separation is one of life’s most emotionally exhausting experiences. Dividing a home, finances, and a shared life is hard enough — but for millions of Australians, the question of who gets the dog, the cat, or the family rabbit can be just as fraught, just as heart-wrenching, and surprisingly, just as legally complex.

Australia is one of the most pet-loving nations in the world. Approximately 69% of Australian households own an animal companion, with 48% owning dogs and 33% owning cats. Given how deeply embedded pets are in our family lives, it is little surprise that disputes over companion animals are now a regular feature of separation proceedings. More than 30% of divorce cases now involve contested pet custody, and over the past decade there has been a 40% increase in pet custody disputes, with family lawyers reporting that around 15% of property disputes involve disagreements over pets.

Landmark changes to Australian family law — which came into effect on 10 June 2025 — have completely transformed how pets are handled when relationships break down. Yet for all the legal progress, the court process remains a slow, costly, and emotionally draining way to resolve what is, at its core, a deeply personal dispute. Family mediation offers something courts simply cannot: a tailored, compassionate, and privately negotiated outcome that puts your pet’s wellbeing — and your own — first.

How Australian Family Law Previously Treated Pets

For decades, Australian family law treated pets the same way it treated a dining table or a television set — as personal property, or “chattels,” to be divided like any other asset.

This approach, while legally tidy, was emotionally tone-deaf. Courts focused on questions of title and ownership documentation rather than the bonds of care, love, and companionship that people share with their animals. The landmark case of Downey & Beale [2017] FCCA 316 illustrated this tension clearly: both parties sought to keep their dog, neither assigned any monetary value to the animal, and both simply expressed their deep love for him. The court acknowledged this emotional significance — but was ultimately constrained to treat the dog as a chattel and determine ownership accordingly.

This framework left many separating Australians feeling that the legal system simply did not understand the role their pet played in their family. The calls for reform grew steadily louder.

The Game-Changing 2025 Reforms: Pets as “Companion Animals”

The 2025 changes to the Family Law Act represent the most significant overhaul of Australian family law in decades, and the treatment of pets is one of its most headline-grabbing elements.

From 10 June 2025, when considering what order, if any, to make about family pets, the family law courts must consider a specific list of matters that apply only in relation to family pets. This framework was introduced through the Family Law Amendment Act 2024 (Cth), which amended the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

Under the new legislation, pets are now legally recognised as “companion animals,” a distinct category that acknowledges their unique role in families. This change allows courts to consider a broader range of factors when determining pet custody, moving beyond mere ownership rights.

The Attorney-General’s Department has confirmed that these changes apply to all separating couples — whether married or in a de facto relationship — across Australia.

What Qualifies as a “Companion Animal”?

Under the new definition, a companion animal is an animal kept primarily for companionship by one or both parties to a marriage or de facto relationship. Most family pets — for example, dogs, cats and similar household animals — are companion animals, while working livestock, commercial breeding animals and service animals are not.

Specifically excluded are:

  • Assistance animals under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)
  • Animals kept as part of a business
  • Animals kept for agricultural purposes
  • Animals kept for laboratory tests or experiments

A working sheep dog, for instance, would not qualify as a companion animal if its primary purpose is herding livestock, even if the family is also emotionally attached to it.

What Courts Must Consider: The Eight Factors

When a separating couple cannot agree on who keeps the family pet, and the matter proceeds to court, the judge is now required to weigh up a specific and comprehensive list of factors. In determining the allocation of a companion animal, the court is mandated to consider: the circumstances of the animal’s acquisition; indicators of legal ownership or current possession; the extent of each party’s contribution to the animal’s care and maintenance; any family violence perpetrated by one party against the other; any history of actual or threatened cruelty or abuse towards the animal by a party; the emotional attachment of a party, or a child of the relationship, to the animal; the demonstrated capacity of each party to provide for the animal’s future care independently; and any other fact or circumstance the court deems relevant to achieving a just and equitable outcome.

In practical terms, this means that whoever has been the primary carer — walking the dog, booking vet appointments, paying for food and grooming, attending obedience classes — now has clear grounds to demonstrate a stronger claim. It also means that evidence of abuse, whether towards the animal or towards a partner, is directly relevant to the outcome. The reforms expressly seek to protect victims of domestic violence and their pets.

What Courts Can — and Cannot — Order

One of the most important limitations of the new framework is what a court cannot do. The court cannot make orders for shared ownership or shared care.

The court can only order sole ownership, a consented transfer or sale of a pet. It cannot consider or make orders for shared care arrangements. Assistance animals and animals kept for business, agriculture or laboratory use are excluded from the companion animal rules under the Act.

In other words, unlike children, there is no legal mechanism for “week-on-week-off” arrangements for your dog, or alternating holidays with your cat. If the matter goes to court, only one party can walk away with the pet. The other party loses all access.

You can however create a shared-care schedule in a private binding financial agreement or consent orders. This is a crucial point — and it is precisely where mediation and negotiated agreements offer something courts simply cannot.

Pets, Domestic Violence, and the New Protections

The intersection of pet disputes and domestic violence is a deeply serious and often overlooked dimension of family separation. Research indicates as many as 7 in 10 cases of domestic and family violence involve animal abuse. Further, it is often the case that pets are used as a tool of coercion or control against victim-survivors of domestic violence. A party may be especially susceptible to making unfair concessions if they know or suspect that the pet may be abused or neglected if retained by the other party.

The 2025 reforms directly address this power imbalance. If an abused partner is confident they would be allowed to keep their companion animal if they leave a violent relationship, there is a greater chance they will seek safety. If a victim has fled to accommodation where they cannot keep their pet, the new laws will allow for a court order to transfer the animal to another person — a safe person.

Where domestic violence is a factor in any separation, mediation may not always be the appropriate first step. If you or someone you know is experiencing family violence, please reach out to:

  • 1800RESPECT: 1800 737 732 (24 hours, 7 days)
  • Lifeline: 13 11 14
  • Emergency services: 000

It is strongly recommended that you seek independent legal advice and safety planning support before engaging in any dispute resolution process where family violence is present.

Why Mediation Is the Smarter Path for Pet Disputes

For couples who are not in a situation involving family violence or safety concerns, mediation is by far the most effective, dignified, and affordable way to resolve a dispute over a family pet.

Here is why mediation wins — and why the courtroom loses — when it comes to companion animals.

1. Mediation Can Create Shared Care Arrangements — Courts Cannot

This is the single most compelling reason to choose mediation. If both you and your former partner want to maintain a relationship with your pet, a court can only give the animal to one of you. Mediation, by contrast, allows you to negotiate a mutually agreed shared-care arrangement — alternating weeks, school holiday schedules, or any arrangement that suits both parties and, crucially, the animal’s wellbeing.

These agreements can then be formalised through consent orders, giving them legal weight and enforceability, while still reflecting the genuine wishes and agreements of both parties rather than an imposed judicial outcome.

2. Mediation Is Significantly Faster and Cheaper

Taking a pet dispute to court is an expensive undertaking. Legal fees in contested family law proceedings can run to tens of thousands of dollars, and the matter can take months or even years to resolve. Mediation typically concludes in a single day or across a small number of sessions, at a fraction of the cost.

The financial reality of going to court for family law disputes is stark. The emotional and financial cost of litigation is rarely justified for a dispute that, with the right facilitation, can be resolved far more swiftly and collaboratively.

3. Mediation Considers the Pet’s Wellbeing, Not Just Ownership

Courts are constrained by legal frameworks. A skilled mediator, on the other hand, can help both parties focus on what is genuinely in the animal’s best interests: continuity of routine, veterinary needs, appropriate housing, emotional stability, and ongoing relationships with children in the family. These are the kinds of nuanced, practical conversations that a formal court process rarely has time for.

4. Mediation Preserves Your Ability to Co-Parent Effectively

Many separating couples share children as well as pets. The family dog or cat is often deeply connected to the children’s sense of comfort and continuity through an incredibly difficult time. A mediated resolution that keeps the animal accessible to the children — regardless of whose “turn” it technically is — serves the whole family’s emotional wellbeing in ways that a winner-takes-all court order simply cannot.

5. Mediation Is Confidential

Court proceedings become part of the public record. If personal matters about your relationship, your finances, or the circumstances of your separation are discussed in mediation, they remain completely confidential. This is particularly important for pet disputes, which can quickly involve sensitive revelations about the nature of the relationship and the conduct of both parties.

What to Bring to Mediation About a Pet

If you are heading into mediation and pets are on the agenda, preparation matters. Here is what can help support your position and contribute to a constructive conversation:

Documentation of care:

  • Vet records, vaccination certificates, microchip registration
  • Pet insurance policies in your name
  • Receipts for food, grooming, boarding, or training
  • Photos documenting your time and relationship with the animal

Practical considerations to raise:

  • Who currently has the animal and where are they living
  • Whether your new accommodation permits pets
  • Whether children are attached to the animal and what contact arrangements exist for the children
  • Whether the animal has any special veterinary or care needs
  • Any concerns about the other party’s capacity or willingness to care properly for the animal

For a full guide to preparing for mediation, Mediations Australia has a comprehensive resource to help you approach the session with clarity and confidence.

How the Law Treats Pets in Western Australia

It is worth noting one important jurisdictional distinction. Property settlements for de facto parties in Western Australia are not dealt with pursuant to the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). The relevant legislation for de facto parties in Western Australia is the Family Court Act 1997 (WA), which had not been amended to reflect the changes in the Family Law Amendment Act 2024 as at October 2025.

Married couples in WA are still governed by the federal Family Law Act 1975 and the new companion animal provisions apply to them. However, de facto couples in WA should seek specific legal advice about how their state legislation applies to their situation.

Beyond the Dog: Horses, Birds, and Other Companion Animals

While dogs make up the majority of contested pet disputes, the new companion animal provisions are not species-specific. Any animal kept primarily for companionship — horses, birds, reptiles, rabbits, guinea pigs — potentially falls within the definition, provided it is not also used for agricultural, commercial, or laboratory purposes.

The emotional significance of these animals to their owners is no less real than that of a dog or cat, and mediation is equally well-suited to resolving disputes about them.

Getting Started: How Mediations Australia Can Help

Resolving a dispute about a beloved pet is about more than legal rights — it is about acknowledging the emotional reality of what that animal means to your family, and finding a solution that is genuinely workable for everyone involved, including the animal itself.

At Mediations Australia, our experienced mediators understand the full complexity of family separation, including the deeply personal dimensions of companion animal disputes. We provide a neutral, confidential, and compassionate environment where separating couples can have the real conversations that matter — and reach agreements that actually reflect the lives they are trying to build going forward.

Whether your situation involves a simple disagreement about who takes the labrador, or a more complex set of considerations involving children, domestic violence concerns, or multiple animals, we are here to help you find a path forward.

Book a consultation with Mediations Australia today — because your pet is a member of your family, and they deserve an outcome that reflects that.

Summary: Key Points to Remember

The 2025 reforms under the Family Law Amendment Act 2024 (Cth) have genuinely transformed how pets are treated when Australian relationships break down. The key points are:

  • Pets are now legally recognised as “companion animals” — not mere property
  • Courts must weigh a specific list of factors including care history, attachment, financial contributions, family violence, and animal cruelty
  • Courts can only order sole ownership, transfer to a third party (with consent), or sale — not shared care
  • Shared care arrangements can only be achieved by private agreement — through mediation or negotiation
  • Mediation offers faster, cheaper, and more flexible outcomes than going to court
  • Where domestic violence is present, safety planning and professional support should be sought before proceeding

Shareholder & Partnership Disputes: Resolving Them with Mediation

By Alternate Dispute Resolution, Litigation, Mediation

Shareholder and partnership disputes are among the most damaging conflicts a business can face. When two or more people who built something together reach an impasse — over strategy, profit distribution, management decisions, or alleged breaches of duty — the fallout can be swift and severe. Assets get frozen. Operations stall. Key staff leave. And if the dispute reaches court, the legal costs alone can cripple even a healthy business.

Australia is currently experiencing elevated levels of corporate stress. Rising interest rates, tightening credit, and inflationary pressure have made boardroom tensions more common. Disagreements that might have been managed during growth periods are now escalating into formal disputes. Against this backdrop, mediation offers shareholders and business partners a structured, confidential, and commercially sensible path forward.


What Triggers Shareholder and Partnership Disputes?

The most common sources of conflict include:

  • Deadlock in decision-making — where equal or near-equal shareholders cannot agree on a material direction for the company
  • Alleged breaches of directors’ duties — under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), directors owe duties of care, good faith, and to act in the best interests of the company
  • Unfair prejudice and oppressive conduct — where a minority shareholder argues their interests are being oppressed by the majority
  • Profit distribution disputes — disagreements over dividends, drawings, or reinvestment
  • Exit and buyout disagreements — when one party wants out but cannot agree on a valuation or mechanism
  • Breaches of shareholder or partnership agreements — including restraint of trade, confidentiality, or non-compete provisions
  • Valuation disputes — where parties disagree fundamentally on what the business or a shareholding is worth

ASIC provides guidance on directors’ duties and corporate governance at asic.gov.au, and many disputes that reach mediation involve at least one alleged breach of these obligations.


The Corporations Act 2001: Key Provisions in Dispute

Oppressive Conduct — Part 2F.1

One of the most significant — and frequently invoked — provisions in shareholder disputes is Part 2F.1 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), which deals with conduct that is “oppressive” to, or “unfairly prejudicial” to, or “unfairly discriminatory” against, a member or members of a company.

A minority shareholder who believes the majority is exercising their power in a way that is commercially unfair — including exclusion from management, withholding of dividends without justification, or dilution of their shareholding — may bring an oppression claim. The courts have broad remedies available, including ordering the purchase of shares, appointing a receiver, modifying the company’s constitution, or winding up the company.

But court proceedings under Part 2F.1 are expensive, slow, and disruptive. Mediation offers an opportunity to address the underlying grievance before the relationship deteriorates to the point of formal oppression proceedings.

Directors’ Duties

Directors of Australian companies owe statutory duties under the Corporations Act, including:

  • A duty to act in good faith in the best interests of the corporation (s 181)
  • A duty to use their powers for a proper purpose (s 181)
  • A duty to avoid conflicts of interest (s 182, s 183)
  • A duty to act with care and diligence (s 180)

When one director accuses another of breaching these duties — for example, by diverting business opportunities to a related entity, or by failing to disclose a conflict — the dispute is often better resolved through mediation than through costly litigation. Mediation allows both parties to surface concerns, exchange information, and negotiate remedies (such as payment of compensation, restructuring of arrangements, or departure terms) without the reputational damage of a public proceeding.


Deadlock Clauses in Shareholder Agreements

A well-drafted shareholder agreement will contain provisions for resolving deadlock — situations where two equal shareholders (often 50/50) are unable to agree on a key decision. Common mechanisms include:

  • Casting vote provisions — giving one director or shareholder a casting vote on specific categories of decision
  • Mediation and arbitration clauses — requiring the parties to engage a mediator or arbitrator before any legal action
  • Russian roulette clauses — where one party offers to buy the other out at a specified price, and the other party can either accept or reverse the offer at the same price
  • Shotgun clauses — where one party names a price and the other must either buy or sell at that price
  • Bring-along and drag-along provisions — to facilitate agreed exits

If your shareholder agreement contains a dispute resolution clause — typically requiring mediation before legal proceedings — you may be contractually obliged to engage that process first. Failing to do so can expose you to adverse cost orders if you commence litigation prematurely.

Even in the absence of a formal agreement, courts across Australia increasingly expect parties to genuine commercial disputes to have attempted mediation before filing proceedings.


Valuation Disputes in Business Exits

One of the most common practical obstacles to resolving a shareholder or partnership dispute is disagreement over what the business — or a particular shareholding — is actually worth.

Valuation disputes arise in several contexts:

  • Buy-sell provisions triggered by retirement, death, or dispute
  • Compulsory share acquisition proceedings under the Corporations Act
  • Exit negotiations where one party wants to sell and the parties cannot agree on price
  • Compensation calculations in oppression or breach of duty claims

Valuations for private companies are notoriously difficult. There is no single correct methodology — different approaches (discounted cash flow, earnings multiples, net asset value) can produce widely divergent results. Expert valuers employed by opposing parties will often produce significantly different figures.

Mediation can be particularly effective in valuation disputes because it allows a conversation about the valuation methodology itself — not just the numbers — and can help parties reach a compromise that avoids the cost and uncertainty of a contested expert process. Some mediators will also facilitate the appointment of a single jointly instructed expert, which substantially reduces cost and removes the adversarial dynamic from the valuation exercise.


Exit Mechanisms and Buyouts

When one party wants to exit a business and the other does not (or cannot agree on terms), the consequences for both the business and the parties can be severe. Common scenarios include:

  • A co-founder who wants to exit after a personal or strategic falling-out
  • A shareholder who has become a passive investor and wants liquidity
  • A family business where one generation wants to exit and the other wants to continue
  • A partner who retires and whose interest needs to be acquired by the continuing partners

In the absence of agreement on exit terms, the exiting party’s options are limited: commence oppression proceedings under the Corporations Act, apply for a winding-up order, or attempt to sell their shares to a third party (which may be restricted by the shareholders agreement).

None of these outcomes is particularly desirable. Winding up a viable business destroys value for everyone. Selling to a third party may be impossible or undesirable. And oppression proceedings are expensive and time-consuming.

Mediation creates a structured environment for the parties to negotiate exit terms — including price, payment arrangements, restraint obligations, and transition support — without the cost and disruption of litigation. Many business exits that begin as adversarial disputes are resolved through mediation on terms that both parties can accept.


The Legal Framework for Resolving Business Disputes

The Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) governs the conduct of companies and their officers. It does not mandate mediation, but it does provide pathways that courts often expect parties to have genuinely attempted before proceeding to litigation.

Most professionally drafted shareholder agreements and partnership agreements contain multi-tiered dispute resolution clauses. These typically require:

  1. Direct negotiation between the parties within a set timeframe
  2. Formal mediation with an accredited mediator if negotiation fails
  3. Arbitration or litigation only as a last resort

If your agreement contains such a clause, you may be contractually obliged to attempt mediation before commencing legal proceedings. Skipping that step can expose a party to adverse cost orders.

Even where no such clause exists, courts across Australia — including the Federal Court and state Supreme Courts — routinely refer commercial disputes to mediation under their case management powers. Mediation is no longer optional in commercial litigation; in many cases, it is expected.


Mediation vs Court-Ordered Winding Up

A court-ordered winding up is often the last resort when a business relationship has completely broken down. But it is also one of the most destructive outcomes available: it destroys the business, deprives both parties of the going concern value of the enterprise, and typically leaves both worse off than a negotiated resolution would have.

Courts have consistently shown reluctance to wind up an otherwise solvent and viable business simply because the shareholders cannot agree. Before making a winding-up order in a shareholder dispute context, courts will typically want to be satisfied that all other options — including mediation and buy-out — have been genuinely explored.

Mediation offers a genuine alternative. Even in deeply adversarial situations, a skilled mediator can help parties understand the cost of the alternatives (including the value destruction inherent in winding up) and reach a negotiated outcome — whether that is a structured buyout, a managed exit, or a business sale to a third party on terms both can accept.


Why Mediation Works for Business Disputes

1. Confidentiality

Unlike court proceedings, mediation is private. What is said in the session cannot be used in subsequent litigation (with limited exceptions). For businesses, this is critical — disputes about finances, operations, or director conduct that become public can damage customer confidence, supplier relationships, and the company’s market position.

2. Speed

Commercial litigation in the Supreme Court or Federal Court can take two to four years from filing to judgment, and often longer. Mediation can typically be scheduled within weeks and resolved within one or two sessions. When a business is deadlocked, time is money.

3. Commercial outcomes

A court can grant specific forms of relief — winding up orders, buy-out orders, injunctions. But a court cannot design a commercial solution that accounts for tax implications, supplier relationships, financing arrangements, or the personal circumstances of the parties. Mediation allows parties to craft outcomes that a judge simply could not impose.

4. Preservation of the business and relationships

Many shareholders have long histories — as friends, family members, or long-term colleagues. Even when the relationship has fractured, mediation provides space to resolve the legal dispute without the adversarial dynamics of litigation, which tend to deepen animosity and make future co-operation impossible.


What Mediation Looks Like in a Business Context

Business mediation typically involves:

  • Pre-mediation preparation — each party prepares a position paper and shares key documents with the mediator
  • Opening session — the mediator explains the process and sets ground rules; each party briefly outlines their position
  • Private caucuses — the mediator meets separately with each party to explore interests, options, and flexibility
  • Joint negotiation — where the parties and mediator work toward a written agreement
  • Settlement deed — if resolved, the parties execute a binding document on the day (often reviewed by their lawyers before signing)

You can read more about what to expect in preparing for mediation and how long mediation takes.


When Is Mediation Not Appropriate?

Mediation requires both parties to engage in good faith. It may not be suitable where:

  • There is evidence of fraud, asset dissipation, or serious criminal conduct requiring urgent court intervention
  • One party is using mediation purely as a delaying tactic
  • There is a severe power imbalance that cannot be managed by the mediator
  • Urgent injunctive relief is needed to protect assets

In those cases, legal advice should be sought immediately and interim court orders may be necessary alongside — or before — any mediation attempt.


The Cost Argument Is Compelling

The difference in cost between mediation and commercial litigation is substantial. Costs of mediation are typically shared between the parties and are generally a fraction of what each side would spend on legal fees in a contested proceeding. When the future of a business is at stake, that distinction matters enormously.

For further context on the financial toll of adversarial dispute resolution, see our piece on the costs of going to court.


Ready to Resolve Your Shareholder Dispute?

Mediations Australia works with business owners, directors, and shareholders to resolve complex commercial disputes efficiently and confidentially. Our accredited mediators understand the commercial and legal landscape.

Book a consultation to discuss your situation and find out whether mediation is the right next step.


This article is general information only and does not constitute legal advice. The law applicable to your situation may differ depending on your jurisdiction and individual circumstances. If you are involved in a shareholder or partnership dispute, you should seek independent legal advice from a qualified Australian solicitor.

Commercial Lease Disputes: How Mediation Resolves Them

By Alternate Dispute Resolution, Litigation, Mediation

When a commercial lease dispute erupts between a landlord and tenant, the consequences can be serious. A retailer forced to close. A landlord watching rental income dry up. A business relationship that once worked perfectly now reduced to letters from solicitors and mounting legal bills.

For Australian business owners and property managers, commercial lease disputes are an increasingly common reality. Rising insolvencies — up 57% in the year to November 2024 according to CreditorWatch — have placed enormous pressure on lease obligations across the country. Melbourne’s office vacancy rate hit 19.6% in late 2024, the highest since 1995, while retail and industrial sectors face their own pressures. In this environment, disputes over rent, outgoings, and make-good obligations are inevitable.

The good news: the vast majority of commercial lease disputes can be resolved without setting foot in a courtroom. Mediation is not only faster and cheaper than litigation — in most Australian states, it is legally required before a dispute can proceed to a tribunal or court.

This article explains how commercial lease disputes arise, what the law requires, and why mediation is the most effective path to resolution.


What Is a Commercial Lease Dispute?

A commercial lease dispute is any disagreement between a landlord and tenant (or subtenant) over the terms, obligations, or performance of a commercial, retail, or industrial lease agreement.

These disputes can arise at any point during the lease term — at inception, during the tenancy, at renewal, or at the end of the lease when make-good obligations come into play.


The Most Common Causes of Commercial Lease Disputes in Australia

Rent Arrears and Rent Reviews

Unpaid rent is the most common trigger. But disputes also frequently arise over how rent reviews are conducted — particularly market rent reviews, where landlords and tenants may have very different views on what the market rate actually is. Ambiguous review clauses, informal arrangements, and disagreements over the timing and method of review can all lead to conflict.

Under most commercial and retail lease legislation, rent review mechanisms must be clearly specified. Disputes often arise when leases contain generic CPI review clauses but market conditions have diverged significantly from inflation, or where fixed percentage increases have become commercially unworkable. A mediator can help both parties reach a pragmatic rent adjustment without requiring a formal valuation dispute process.

Outgoings and Unexpected Charges

Commercial leases typically pass property-related expenses — rates, insurance, maintenance, management fees — to the tenant as “outgoings.” Disputes arise when outgoings are poorly disclosed upfront, exceed estimates, or include charges the tenant disputes as recoverable (such as capital works or land tax).

Under state-based retail leases legislation, landlords have specific disclosure obligations. Failure to comply can render parts of the lease unenforceable, which is itself a source of dispute.

Make-Good Obligations

At the end of a lease, tenants are typically required to restore the premises to their original condition — removing fit-out, repairing damage, and reinstating the space. The scope of this obligation is frequently disputed, particularly when lease terms are vague or the premises have changed significantly during the tenancy.

Make-good disputes are particularly amenable to mediation. Often, the real issue is not who is legally right but rather reaching a practical and cost-effective agreement about what work needs to be done and who will fund it. Landlords frequently prefer a cash settlement over insisting on costly reinstatement that may simply be demolished before the next fit-out anyway.

Repairs and Maintenance Responsibilities

Who is responsible for a leaking roof, a broken HVAC system, or structural damage? Lease agreements often draw a line between landlord and tenant responsibilities, but that line is frequently contested — especially in older buildings where the distinction between fair wear and tear and actual damage is blurred.

Early Termination and Lease Break Clauses

When a business fails or circumstances change, tenants sometimes need to exit a lease before its expiry. Disputes over whether a break clause applies, what notice is required, and what the financial consequences are can quickly become adversarial.

Lease Renewal and Option Disputes

Tenants who have invested in fit-out and built a customer base at a location have a strong interest in lease renewal. Disputes over whether an option was validly exercised, what terms apply on renewal, and whether the landlord is obliged to grant a new lease are common — and can have significant consequences for both parties.


What the Law Requires: State-by-State Overview

Australia’s approach to retail and commercial lease disputes is governed by state and territory legislation. In most jurisdictions, mediation is a mandatory step before a dispute can be escalated to a tribunal or court.

New South Wales

The Retail Leases Act 1994 (NSW) requires parties to retail lease disputes to apply to the NSW Small Business Commissioner for mediation before the matter can proceed to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT). The cost of mediation is typically shared equally between the parties. The Commissioner’s mediation service is available for disputes involving retail leases, including disputes about rent, outgoings, make-good, and lease renewal. If mediation fails, the Commissioner issues a certificate that must accompany any application to NCAT.

Victoria

The Retail Leases Act 2003 (Vic) requires retail lease disputes to be referred to the Victorian Small Business Commission (VSBC) before proceeding to VCAT. The VSBC offers free preliminary assistance and low-cost mediation — an accessible entry point for businesses of all sizes. The VSBC can also assist with disputes about the disclosure statement or the validity of the lease itself.

Queensland

The Retail Shop Leases Act 1994 (Qld) directs retail lease disputes through the Queensland Small Business Commissioner (QSBC), which provides mediation services. Disputes unresolved at mediation can proceed to QCAT, which can hear retail shop lease disputes up to $750,000 in value.

South Australia

South Australia’s Retail and Commercial Leases Act 1995 (SA) governs both retail and commercial leases in certain circumstances. The Small Business Commissioner SA provides mediation services for tenancy disputes before parties can access SACAT (the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal).

Western Australia

The Commercial Tenancy (Retail Shops) Agreements Act 1985 (WA) and the Small Business Commissioner Act 2012 (WA) establish a mediation pathway for retail lease disputes in Western Australia. The Small Business Development Corporation provides free dispute resolution assistance.

Australian Capital Territory and Northern Territory

Similar frameworks operate in the ACT and NT. The Leases (Commercial and Retail) Act 2001 (ACT) requires parties to attempt mediation before proceeding to ACAT. Northern Territory tenancy disputes can be referred to the Tenancy Dispute Resolution Service.

For non-retail commercial leases — office, industrial, or mixed-use — mandatory mediation may not apply, but private mediation through a service like Mediations Australia remains the most practical and cost-effective first step.


Cost Comparison: Mediation vs Litigation

The financial case for mediation is compelling. Consider the realistic cost comparison for a mid-range commercial lease dispute:

Pathway Approximate Cost (each party) Timeframe
Mediation (Small Business Commissioner) $0–$500 2–8 weeks
Private mediation $1,500–$4,000 1–4 weeks
Tribunal hearing (NCAT/VCAT/QCAT) $5,000–$20,000+ 3–12 months
Supreme Court litigation $30,000–$150,000+ 1–4 years

These are indicative ranges only. Costs vary significantly depending on the complexity of the dispute, legal representation, and jurisdiction.

Even in a relatively straightforward dispute over unpaid rent of $30,000, the cost of litigating through a Supreme Court could easily exceed the value of the claim. Mediation, in contrast, can produce a binding agreement at a fraction of the cost — often within a few weeks.


Why Mediation Is the Right Choice for Commercial Lease Disputes

Cost

Commercial litigation is expensive. Legal fees, tribunal filing fees, and the time cost of drawn-out proceedings can quickly eclipse the value of the original dispute. A mediated outcome — even one that involves a rent reduction or a negotiated lease exit — is almost always cheaper than the alternative.

Speed

Tribunal and court proceedings for commercial lease matters can take months or years to resolve. Mediation can be arranged within days or weeks, and many disputes are resolved in a single session. For a business operating under the cloud of an unresolved dispute, speed matters enormously.

Confidentiality

Court proceedings create a public record. Mediation is entirely confidential — what is said in the room stays in the room. For businesses concerned about reputation, client relationships, or competitive sensitivity, this is a significant advantage.

Preservation of the Commercial Relationship

Not every lease dispute ends the tenancy. In many cases, both parties want to continue the relationship — just on terms that work. A mediator facilitates a conversation that courts cannot: one that acknowledges both parties’ legitimate interests and works toward a solution both can live with. The adversarial posturing of litigation makes this kind of resolution almost impossible.

Control Over the Outcome

When a dispute goes to a tribunal or court, the decision is made by someone with no understanding of your business, your circumstances, or your relationship with the other party. Mediation puts decision-making power back in the hands of the people who actually have to live with the outcome.

You can read more about how mediation works and what to expect from the process on our resources page.


What Happens in a Commercial Lease Mediation Session?

A typical commercial lease mediation follows this structure:

1. Pre-mediation preparation
Both parties are asked to prepare a brief summary of their position and the key issues in dispute. Relevant documents — the lease agreement, correspondence, financial records — are gathered. You can review our guide on preparing for mediation for practical tips.

2. Opening statements
Each party has an opportunity to explain their perspective without interruption. The mediator listens, asks clarifying questions, and begins to map the issues.

3. Joint and private sessions
The mediator may facilitate joint discussion between the parties, or conduct separate private sessions (“shuttle mediation”) where confidential conversations take place with each party. This is particularly useful where the relationship has broken down or emotions are running high. Learn more about shuttle mediation and whether it might suit your situation.

4. Negotiation and agreement
The mediator helps the parties explore options, test proposals, and move toward agreement. When an agreement is reached, it is documented and signed by both parties — creating an enforceable record of the resolution.

5. If mediation is unsuccessful
If the parties cannot reach agreement, the mediator (or the relevant Small Business Commissioner) issues a certificate confirming that mediation has been attempted. This certificate is typically required to proceed to a tribunal or court.


Common Mistakes in Commercial Lease Disputes

Understanding what not to do is just as important as knowing the process. Here are the most common mistakes parties make when navigating commercial lease disputes:

Escalating too early

Many landlords issue formal breach notices or termination notices before attempting any direct conversation. This immediately entrenches the dispute and often triggers defensive responses from tenants. A phone call or meeting — or an early referral to mediation — can resolve many issues before they harden into formal disputes.

Ignoring disclosure obligations

Landlords who fail to meet their disclosure obligations under the relevant retail leases legislation may find that their ability to enforce certain lease terms is compromised. Before taking action in a dispute, it is important to understand whether your own conduct under the lease has been technically compliant.

Treating the dispute as purely legal

Commercial lease disputes are business disputes. The best outcomes account for the practical and commercial realities facing both parties — the landlord’s need for cash flow and an occupied tenancy, the tenant’s need for a viable operating cost base. Focusing purely on legal rights often produces pyrrhic victories.

Not preparing adequately for mediation

Arriving at mediation without a clear understanding of your own legal position, the documents supporting your case, and your desired outcome wastes the process. Good preparation — including, where appropriate, obtaining legal advice before the session — dramatically improves the prospects of resolution.

Delaying too long

The longer a dispute festers, the more expensive it becomes and the more entrenched the parties’ positions become. Early mediation — even before formal legal action is threatened — is almost always more productive than mediation that occurs only after litigation has been filed.


What Happens After Mediation Fails?

In the minority of cases where mediation does not produce a resolution, the parties are not left without options. The pathway depends on the jurisdiction and the nature of the lease:

  • Retail leases: The mediating body (Small Business Commissioner or equivalent) will issue a certificate of failed mediation, which is required before proceeding to the relevant tribunal.
  • Non-retail commercial leases: The parties may pursue their dispute through the relevant state Supreme Court or District Court, depending on the value of the claim. In NSW, the District Court has jurisdiction up to $750,000; above that, the Supreme Court.
  • Urgent matters: Where a tenant faces imminent eviction or a landlord faces immediate loss, urgent injunctive relief can be sought from a court even before or during a mediation process.

It is also worth noting that failed mediation does not foreclose the possibility of later settlement. Many commercial lease disputes that do not resolve at mediation are subsequently settled through solicitor-to-solicitor negotiation, often on the eve of a tribunal hearing. The mediation process, even when it does not produce an agreement on the day, typically narrows the issues and brings the parties closer together.


Tips for Preparing for Commercial Lease Mediation

  • Gather your documents early. Bring the full lease agreement, all correspondence, financial records relevant to the dispute, and any notices or demands issued.
  • Know your bottom line. Before you enter mediation, be clear on what outcome you need and what you are prepared to accept.
  • Focus on interests, not positions. The most productive mediations happen when parties explain what they actually need, not just what they are demanding. A landlord may need cash flow certainty; a tenant may need reduced outgoings in the short term. Understanding each other’s underlying interests opens up solutions that pure positional bargaining cannot.
  • Be prepared to compromise. Mediation is not a win-lose process. Both parties will likely move from their opening positions. That is not weakness — it is pragmatism.
  • Consider whether legal advice is appropriate. While you do not need a lawyer in mediation, it can be helpful to obtain independent legal advice before the session to understand your rights and obligations under the lease and the relevant legislation.

Key Takeaways

  • Commercial lease disputes are increasingly common in Australia, driven by economic pressure, rising insolvencies, and complex lease obligations
  • The most frequent causes are rent arrears, outgoings disputes, make-good obligations, and repair responsibilities
  • In most Australian states, mediation is legally required before a retail lease dispute can proceed to a tribunal or court
  • The cost of mediation is a fraction of litigation — even in relatively modest disputes
  • Mediation is faster, cheaper, confidential, and more likely to preserve the commercial relationship than litigation
  • Both landlords and tenants benefit from early engagement with mediation rather than allowing disputes to escalate

Resolve Your Commercial Lease Dispute Without Going to Court

Whether you are a landlord dealing with a tenant in arrears, a tenant disputing excessive outgoings, or either party facing a make-good claim at the end of a lease, mediation offers a faster, cheaper, and less damaging path to resolution.

At Mediations Australia, our accredited mediators have extensive experience with commercial lease disputes across all Australian states and territories. We can arrange mediation quickly and help both parties reach a durable, enforceable agreement.

Book a consultation with Mediations Australia →


This article is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For personalised guidance regarding your specific situation, please consult a qualified legal professional or accredited mediator.

Contesting a Will in Australia Can Mediation Avoid a Court Battle

Contesting a Will in Australia: Can Mediation Avoid a Court Battle?

By Estate Dispute Mediation, Mediation

Few disputes carry the emotional weight of a contested will. The grief of losing someone you love is compounded by the shock of discovering that their estate plan does not reflect what you believed was fair, what was promised, or what you need to survive. Add siblings, step-parents, estranged children, or a second spouse into the mix, and the ingredients for a prolonged and bitter legal battle are in place before anyone has even spoken to a lawyer.

In Australia, contesting a will — formally known as making a family provision claim — is remarkably common. More than 80 per cent of contested estate matters that reach the Supreme Court are resolved through mediation rather than a judge’s ruling. That statistic is significant, because it means that for the vast majority of families, the courtroom is not where the outcome is decided. It is decided around a mediation table, often in a single day, at a fraction of the cost and emotional toll of a trial. Understanding how this process works — and when to consider mediation before formal proceedings are even filed — can save families tens of thousands of dollars and preserve relationships that litigation would almost certainly destroy.

What Does “Contesting a Will” Actually Mean?

In Australian law, contesting a will most commonly refers to a family provision claim. This is a legal application made to the Supreme Court of the relevant state or territory by a person who believes the deceased’s will does not make adequate provision for their proper maintenance, education, or advancement in life.

Family provision claims are not about overturning a will because you disagree with it. They are based on the legal principle that a person has a moral obligation to provide for certain people — typically close family members and dependants — and that this obligation persists even after death. Every Australian state and territory has legislation enabling these claims, though the specific rules, eligible categories, and time limits vary between jurisdictions.

Key Legislation by State

The principal legislation governing family provision claims in each jurisdiction includes the Succession Act 2006 (NSW), the Administration and Probate Act 1958 (Vic), the Succession Act 1981 (Qld), the Family Provision Act 1972 (WA), the Inheritance (Family Provision) Act 1972 (SA), the Testator’s Family Maintenance Act 1912 (Tas), the Family Provision Act 1970 (NT), and the Administration and Probate Act 1929 (ACT).

While the details differ, the core framework across all jurisdictions is consistent: an eligible person may apply to the court for provision from a deceased estate if they can demonstrate that the will — or the rules of intestacy, if there is no valid will — does not adequately provide for them.

Who Can Contest a Will?

Eligibility to make a family provision claim varies by state and territory, but the following categories are recognised in most jurisdictions:

Spouses and de facto partners at the time of the deceased’s death have an unconditional right to apply in every state and territory. Former spouses may also be eligible, particularly if they were receiving or entitled to receive maintenance.

Children of the deceased — including biological, adopted, and in some jurisdictions stepchildren — are eligible in all states and territories. In Queensland, stepchildren have explicit standing under section 40 of the Succession Act 1981, provided the deceased was married to or in a de facto relationship with the stepchild’s parent at the time of death.

Grandchildren may apply in several jurisdictions, typically where they were wholly or partly dependent on the deceased or were members of the deceased’s household. In NSW, grandchildren are listed as eligible persons under section 57 of the Succession Act 2006.

Other dependants and household members may also be eligible depending on the jurisdiction. In Victoria, the legislation is notably broader — any person who believes the deceased had a responsibility to provide for them may apply, making it the most open-ended eligibility framework in Australia.

Strict Time Limits Apply

One of the most critical aspects of contesting a will is the limitation period. In NSW, a family provision claim must be filed within 12 months of the date of death. This deadline is strictly enforced, and missing it typically means permanently losing the right to make a claim. In Victoria, the limitation period is six months from the date probate is granted. In Queensland, the period is nine months from the date of death, although for deaths before 1 November 2006 it is six months from probate.

Courts may grant extensions in exceptional circumstances, but applicants should never assume this will occur. The countdown begins from the date of death — not from when you learn the contents of the will or when probate is granted — in most jurisdictions. This makes seeking early legal advice essential.

The Problem with Litigation in Estate Disputes

Estate disputes that proceed to a full hearing in the Supreme Court are among the most expensive and emotionally destructive forms of civil litigation in Australia. The reasons are straightforward.

Costs erode the estate. Both the applicant’s costs and the executor’s costs of defending the claim are typically paid from the estate. This means that every dollar spent on legal fees is a dollar removed from the pool available to all beneficiaries. In contested estate proceedings, combined legal costs of $30,000 to $50,000 for a mediation phase and $100,000 or more for a full hearing are not unusual. For modest estates — those under $500,000 — this can consume a devastating proportion of the assets. NSW courts now have the power to cap costs in small estate matters under Practice Note SC EQ 07, reflecting the severity of this problem.

Delays compound the harm. After a mediation that does not settle, hearing dates may not be available for 12 to 18 months. During this period, the estate remains frozen, legal fees continue to accrue, and the emotional toll on all parties intensifies. What might have been a six-month process with mediation can stretch to three years or more with a full trial.

Relationships are destroyed. Estate disputes pit family members against each other in an adversarial forum. Affidavits are filed detailing personal grievances, financial circumstances, and the nature of each party’s relationship with the deceased. Cross-examination can be brutal. Many families that go through a contested estate hearing never speak to each other again. As one experienced succession practitioner has observed, litigation does not just divide an estate — it divides a family permanently.

How Mediation Works in Contested Estate Matters

Mediation is now a compulsory step in family provision claims in NSW, and courts in Victoria, Queensland, and other jurisdictions routinely refer contested estate matters to mediation before listing them for hearing. In NSW, section 98 of the Succession Act 2006 requires the court to refer family provision proceedings to mediation unless there are special reasons justifying a departure from this requirement.

The process typically unfolds as follows.

Before Court Proceedings

In many cases, it is possible to attempt mediation before any formal court proceedings are filed. This approach, sometimes called pre-litigation mediation, involves the claimant’s legal representative notifying the executor of the estate that a claim is being considered, providing a summary of the basis for the claim, and proposing mediation as a first step. If the executor and other affected beneficiaries agree, a private mediator can be engaged to facilitate negotiations.

Pre-litigation mediation has significant advantages. It avoids court filing fees, reduces legal costs substantially, and allows the parties to explore resolution before positions harden. It also keeps the dispute entirely confidential — once court proceedings are filed, the existence of the claim becomes a matter of public record. For families who want to resolve the matter privately and preserve relationships, early mediation is often the best option.

Court-Ordered Mediation

If court proceedings are filed, all family provision claims in NSW will be referred to mediation by the court, typically at the first directions hearing approximately 28 days after filing. The judge will set a timetable requiring the executor to file responsive affidavits and for all parties to prepare for mediation. The mediation is then scheduled, usually within a few months of the first directions hearing.

The mediation itself is facilitated by an accredited mediator — either a private mediator agreed upon by the parties or, for smaller estates, a judicial registrar at the court at no additional cost. All parties attend, typically with their legal representatives. The mediator does not make a decision or impose an outcome. Instead, they help the parties understand each other’s positions, assess the strengths and weaknesses of the claim, and negotiate a settlement that all parties can accept.

Mediations in contested estate matters usually take one full day, though complex multi-party disputes may require additional sessions. The cost of mediation — including the mediator’s day rate, which typically ranges from $2,500 to $7,000 depending on the complexity of the estate and the seniority of the mediator, plus venue hire — is shared equally between the parties unless otherwise agreed.

Why Mediation Succeeds in Estate Disputes

The settlement rate for estate mediations is remarkably high. Over 80 per cent of family provision claims that are referred to mediation in NSW are resolved without proceeding to a hearing. Similar rates are reported in Victoria and Queensland. There are several reasons why mediation is particularly effective in this context.

The Costs Equation Favours Settlement

Because both parties’ legal costs are typically borne by the estate, every party has a direct financial incentive to settle early. A settlement reached at mediation preserves more of the estate for distribution. Continuing to a full hearing means that a substantial portion of whatever the court ultimately awards — or whatever the beneficiaries retain — will have been consumed by legal fees. This economic reality motivates genuine engagement in mediation.

Flexible Outcomes

Courts making family provision orders are limited to ordering that a specified sum or proportion of the estate be paid to the applicant. Mediation, by contrast, allows the parties to craft creative solutions that a court cannot. These might include the transfer of specific assets — such as the family home or a particular item of sentimental value — structured payment arrangements over time, the establishment of a trust for a beneficiary with a disability, agreements about the timing of property sales to maximise value, or arrangements that honour the deceased’s intentions while also meeting the applicant’s needs.

Confidentiality

Estate disputes often involve deeply personal information about family relationships, financial circumstances, health conditions, and the deceased’s reasons for the distribution in their will. Mediation keeps all of this confidential. Court proceedings, by contrast, generate publicly accessible affidavits, transcripts, and judgments. For families concerned about privacy, mediation offers significant protection.

Preserving Relationships

Perhaps most importantly, mediation allows family members to have a facilitated conversation rather than an adversarial confrontation. The mediator can help parties understand each other’s perspective, acknowledge grief and loss, and find common ground. While not every family relationship can be repaired after an estate dispute, mediation gives families the best possible chance of maintaining some form of connection. For families with ongoing relationships — particularly where grandchildren are involved — this is an outcome of immeasurable value.

Preparing for Estate Mediation

Thorough preparation for mediation is essential to achieving the best possible outcome. The following steps will help you approach the process effectively.

Understand the estate. Before mediation, ensure you have a clear picture of the estate’s assets and liabilities. The executor is required to provide this information, and in court-ordered mediations, the court will typically direct the executor to file an inventory of the estate. Knowing the size of the estate is critical to assessing what a realistic outcome looks like.

Assess the strength of your claim. Not all family provision claims are equal. Courts consider a range of factors, including the nature of your relationship with the deceased, your financial position and needs, whether you have a disability, the size of the estate, any contributions you made to the estate or to the deceased’s welfare, the deceased’s reasons for the distribution in their will, and the competing claims of other eligible persons. In NSW, section 60(2) of the Succession Act 2006 lists 16 factors the court may consider. Understanding how these factors apply to your situation helps you negotiate from a position of informed realism.

Know what you want — and what you need. There is often a difference between what a person feels entitled to and what they genuinely need. Mediation works best when you have a clear sense of your priorities. Is your primary concern financial security? Is it about a specific asset with sentimental value? Is it about recognition and acknowledgment? Knowing your priorities allows you and your legal representative to negotiate strategically.

Consider who pays and cost implications. If the claim is likely to succeed, costs will generally be ordered from the estate. But if it fails, you may bear your own costs and potentially the estate’s costs of defending the claim. Understanding the cost risks informs your approach to settlement negotiations.

Approach the process in good faith. Mediation is not a rehearsal for trial. It is a genuine opportunity to resolve the dispute. Attending with a willingness to listen, to negotiate, and to consider reasonable proposals significantly increases the likelihood of reaching an agreement.

When Mediation May Not Be Appropriate

While mediation resolves the overwhelming majority of contested estate matters, it is not suitable in every circumstance. Mediation may not be appropriate where there are allegations of fraud, forgery, or undue influence in the making of the will — these are validity challenges that may require judicial determination. Similarly, where one party refuses to engage in good faith or where there is a significant power imbalance between the parties that cannot be adequately managed in a mediation setting, the matter may need to proceed to a hearing.

However, even in complex multi-party disputes involving blended families, multiple wills, or allegations of lack of testamentary capacity, experienced mediators regularly achieve settlements. The question is not whether mediation can work — in the vast majority of cases, it can — but whether all parties are willing to engage constructively in the process.

The Cost of Not Mediating

Consider the alternative. A family provision claim that proceeds to a full hearing in the Supreme Court will typically involve preparation of detailed affidavits by all parties, briefing a barrister, multiple directions hearings, a trial lasting one to five days depending on complexity, and the possibility of an appeal. Combined legal costs across all parties can easily exceed $150,000 to $200,000 for a contested hearing. For an estate worth $500,000, this means that 30 to 40 per cent of the assets could be consumed by legal fees alone — regardless of the outcome.

By contrast, a successful mediation — including pre-mediation legal preparation — might cost each party between $5,000 and $15,000, with the mediator’s fees shared between them. The difference is not marginal. It is the difference between a meaningful inheritance and an inheritance consumed by the cost of fighting over it. Understanding how long mediation takes compared with court proceedings makes the case even more compelling — most mediations conclude in a single day, while court proceedings stretch over months or years.

Taking the First Step

If you are considering contesting a will, or if you are an executor or beneficiary facing a family provision claim, the most important decision you can make is to explore mediation early. Whether you engage a private mediator before filing court proceedings or prepare thoroughly for court-ordered mediation, the evidence is clear: mediation resolves estate disputes faster, more affordably, and with far less damage to family relationships than litigation.

At Mediations Australia, our accredited mediators have extensive experience in estate dispute mediation across all Australian states and territories. We work with families navigating the most sensitive and emotionally charged disputes, and we achieve resolution in over 90 per cent of cases. If you are facing a contested estate matter, contact us today for a free, confidential consultation to discuss your options.


This article is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Family provision claims involve complex state and territory-specific legislation with strict time limits. For personalised guidance regarding your specific situation, please consult a qualified legal professional or accredited mediator.

Franchise Disputes in Australia

Franchise Disputes in Australia: Mediation Under the Franchising Code of Conduct

By Mediation, Workplace Mediation

Australia’s franchise sector is one of the largest in the world. With over 1,200 franchise systems operating more than 94,000 individual outlets, the industry generates approximately $174 billion in annual revenue and employs upwards of 565,000 Australians across virtually every consumer-facing industry — from fast food and fitness to real estate, automotive services, and aged care. Franchising, when it works well, offers franchisees a proven business model and brand recognition while allowing franchisors to scale efficiently. But the relationship between franchisor and franchisee is an inherently complex one, built on contracts, trust, and the sometimes-difficult alignment of competing commercial interests.

When that alignment fractures — over fees, territory encroachment, operational directives, renewal terms, or termination conditions — the financial and emotional consequences can be severe. For a franchisee who has invested their life savings, the stakes are existential. For a franchisor managing network stability and brand reputation, an escalating dispute can send shockwaves through the entire system. This is precisely why the Australian Government, through the Franchising Code of Conduct, has mandated a structured dispute resolution process that places mediation at its centre — recognising that collaborative resolution almost always produces better commercial outcomes than courtroom litigation. At Mediations Australia, our accredited mediators work with franchisors and franchisees across the country to resolve disputes efficiently, confidentially, and in a way that protects both the business and the relationship.

Understanding the Franchising Code of Conduct

The Franchising Code of Conduct is a mandatory industry code prescribed under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) and enforced by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). It governs the conduct of both franchisors and franchisees throughout the entire lifecycle of the franchise relationship, from pre-contractual disclosure through to termination and post-agreement obligations. Every franchise agreement entered into, renewed, extended, or transferred in Australia is subject to its provisions.

The Code underwent its most significant overhaul in over a decade when the Competition and Consumer (Industry Codes — Franchising) Regulations 2024 introduced a comprehensively remade Code, effective from 1 April 2025, with certain provisions commencing on 1 November 2025. The reforms, which followed the Schaper Review of the franchise sector, deliver stronger franchisee protections, enhanced disclosure obligations, and critically, more robust dispute resolution mechanisms. Among the headline changes are a new requirement for franchise agreements to provide franchisees with a reasonable opportunity to make a return on their investment, mandatory compensation provisions for early termination by the franchisor, limits on post-termination restraint of trade clauses, and significantly increased penalties for Code breaches — now set at 600 penalty units per violation, equating to $198,000 for individuals and $990,000 for companies. In the 2025 Federal Budget, the ACCC was also allocated $7.1 million specifically to strengthen franchising law enforcement, signalling the Government’s commitment to active compliance monitoring across the sector.

Common Types of Franchise Disputes

Franchise disputes can arise at any stage of the relationship and across a wide range of commercial issues. Recognising the most common categories helps both parties identify emerging problems early and take proactive steps toward resolution before positions harden.

Pre-Contractual Disclosure and Misrepresentation

A significant proportion of franchise disputes trace back to the pre-contractual period. Franchisees may allege that the franchisor failed to disclose material information in the Disclosure Document, that projected earnings or costs were materially misrepresented, or that the true financial performance of the franchise system was obscured. The new Code has strengthened disclosure requirements — including mandatory updates to Disclosure Documents and additional information on the Franchise Disclosure Register — but disputes about what was said, shown, or implied before the agreement was signed remain among the most common complaints lodged with the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman (ASBFEO).

Fees, Royalties, and Marketing Fund Management

Disagreements about the quantum and application of franchise fees, the calculation of royalties, and the transparency of marketing fund expenditure are a persistent source of friction. Franchisees often question whether marketing fund contributions are being spent in ways that genuinely benefit their individual outlet or territory. The new Code has introduced enhanced accountability requirements for marketing funds and other “specific purpose funds,” but the inherent tension between franchisor-controlled spending and franchisee expectations of tangible local benefit continues to generate disputes.

Territory Rights and Encroachment

Franchise agreements typically define the territory within which a franchisee may operate, whether on an exclusive or non-exclusive basis. Disputes arise when franchisors grant new franchise outlets in areas that encroach on an existing franchisee’s customer base, establish company-owned outlets nearby, or expand into online and delivery channels that compete directly with bricks-and-mortar franchisees. These disputes often carry significant financial stakes, as territory erosion can fundamentally undermine the viability of a franchisee’s business.

Operational Standards and Compliance Obligations

Maintaining brand consistency is a legitimate franchisor interest, and franchise agreements invariably contain detailed operational requirements. However, disputes emerge when franchisees view compliance directives as unreasonable, when mandated refurbishments or system upgrades impose costs that the franchisee cannot absorb, or when enforcement of standards appears inconsistent across the network. The line between reasonable operational control and excessive interference is frequently contested.

Renewal, Termination, and Exit

Among the most emotionally and financially charged franchise disputes are those involving the end of the franchise relationship. Disagreements about renewal conditions, the terms of a forced or voluntary exit, the transfer or sale of the franchise business, and the application of post-termination restraint of trade clauses are common. The ASBFEO has reported that disputes relating to exits, terminations, and the sale of franchise businesses are consistently among the matters requiring the most intensive case management. The new Code’s provisions on early termination compensation and restraint limitations are welcome reforms, but exit disputes remain inherently high-stakes.

The Mandatory Dispute Resolution Framework

The Franchising Code prescribes a structured, two-step dispute resolution process that both parties must follow before resorting to court proceedings. This framework reflects the policy position — supported by decades of evidence — that commercial disputes are overwhelmingly better resolved through negotiation and mediation than through litigation.

Step 1: Issue a Notice of Dispute

When a dispute arises, the first step is for either party to issue a written notice of dispute to the other. The ACCC’s guidance on resolving franchising disputes explains that this notice must clearly set out the nature of the dispute, the outcome sought, and the action the issuing party believes will resolve the matter. The parties are then expected to attempt resolution through direct negotiation within a reasonable timeframe.

Step 2: Proceed to Alternative Dispute Resolution

If direct negotiation does not resolve the dispute, either party may refer the matter to alternative dispute resolution — being mediation or conciliation. Under the Code, the ASBFEO facilitates access to independent ADR practitioners and can appoint a mediator or conciliator to assist. Once a dispute has been referred to ADR, both parties are required to attend and try to resolve the dispute in good faith. Mediation costs are generally shared equally between the parties, unless they agree otherwise.

The new Code has also introduced a significant practical reform: multi-party mediation. This allows multiple franchisees who have similar disputes with the same franchisor to participate in a single mediation process. This is an important acknowledgment that many franchise disputes are systemic rather than isolated — arising from network-wide policies, fee structures, or operational changes that affect numerous franchisees simultaneously. Multi-party mediation reduces duplication, lowers costs, and enables a coordinated resolution that addresses the underlying systemic issue rather than forcing each affected franchisee to pursue an individual complaint.

Why Mediation Works for Franchise Disputes

Franchise disputes are fundamentally commercial in nature. They involve ongoing business relationships, substantial financial investments, confidential operational information, and reputational considerations that make courtroom litigation a particularly blunt and damaging instrument. Mediation offers distinct advantages that are directly aligned with the commercial realities of the franchise sector.

Preserving the Commercial Relationship

Litigation is adversarial by design. It produces winners and losers, generates public judgments, and almost invariably destroys the commercial relationship between the parties. In a franchise context, the damage extends further — other franchisees in the network observe how disputes are handled, and prospective franchisees research a system’s dispute history before committing their capital. Mediation is collaborative and confidential. It allows both parties to address their concerns directly, explore creative solutions, and reach outcomes that preserve the franchise relationship where viable — or facilitate a commercially sensible exit where it is not.

Speed

Franchise disputes that proceed to the Federal Court or state courts can take years to reach final hearing. Throughout that period, the franchisee’s business may be deteriorating, the franchisor’s network may be destabilised, and both parties accumulate legal costs that often dwarf the value of the underlying dispute. Mediation can typically be arranged within a matter of weeks and concluded in one to two sessions. The ASBFEO’s active case management reinforces this efficiency — ASBFEO data shows that approximately 15 per cent of all contacts to the Ombudsman relate to franchising matters, and the office actively case-manages over 150 franchise disputes annually.

Cost-Effectiveness

The financial accessibility of mediation is particularly significant in franchising, where the power imbalance between a well-resourced franchisor and an individual franchisee is often stark. For a franchisee who has invested their savings into the business, the cost of mediation — typically a fraction of even the preliminary stages of litigation — can be the difference between pursuing a legitimate dispute and simply absorbing an unfair outcome because they cannot afford to fight. Franchisors also benefit, particularly given the new Code’s multi-party mediation provisions, which can resolve network-wide disputes in a single process rather than through a series of costly individual claims.

Confidentiality

Franchise disputes frequently involve commercially sensitive information — financial performance data, proprietary operating systems, supplier contracts, and strategic plans. Court proceedings place this material on the public record. Mediation keeps it strictly confidential. For franchisors, this protects brand integrity and system-wide confidence. For franchisees, it protects personal financial information and preserves their ability to sell or transition the business without the taint of public litigation.

Flexible and Creative Outcomes

Courts are confined to the legal remedies available to them, principally damages, injunctions, or declarations. Mediation allows parties to craft outcomes that are far more commercially nuanced. A franchise mediation might result in revised fee structures, amended territory boundaries, phased exit arrangements with transition support, marketing fund governance reforms, extended agreement terms, or any other commercially sensible arrangement that addresses the genuine interests of both parties. These tailored solutions are not available through litigation and are far more likely to produce outcomes that both parties can live with and comply with over time. Research consistently shows that mediated agreements attract significantly higher voluntary compliance rates than court-imposed orders.

The Expanded Role of the ASBFEO

The ASBFEO plays an increasingly important role in franchise dispute resolution, particularly under the strengthened provisions of the new Code. Beyond facilitating access to ADR services and actively case-managing disputes, the Ombudsman now has the power to publicly name franchisors who refuse to participate in, or withdraw from, alternative dispute resolution processes. This “name and shame” power, available under section 74 of the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman Act 2015, is a significant reputational deterrent.

Published ASBFEO case studies illustrate how effective this power has already been. In one reported matter, a franchisor repeatedly ignored correspondence and a formal Notice to Mediate until the Ombudsman advised that it intended to publish the franchisor’s refusal to participate. The franchisor promptly re-engaged, attended mediation, and the parties reached a commercial resolution. This pattern — initial resistance followed by engagement once the prospect of public naming becomes real — underscores the practical importance of the ASBFEO’s expanded role and the broader policy direction toward compelling good-faith participation in dispute resolution.

Preparing for Franchise Mediation

Effective preparation for mediation is critical in franchise disputes, which tend to be document-heavy, financially complex, and emotionally charged. The following steps will help ensure you approach the mediation in the strongest possible position.

Understand your franchise agreement. Before mediation, review the specific provisions of your franchise agreement that relate to the issues in dispute. Identify the rights, obligations, and dispute resolution clauses that are relevant. If your agreement was entered into, renewed, or transferred after 1 April 2025, be aware that the new Code provisions apply in full.

Organise your financial and documentary evidence. Franchise disputes invariably involve financial data: revenue figures, fee calculations, marketing fund statements, territory performance data, and correspondence between the parties. Prepare these documents in an organised, accessible format. If the financial position is complex, consider engaging an accountant to prepare a summary that can be shared during the mediation.

Assess your alternatives realistically. Before entering any negotiation, you should understand your best alternative to a negotiated agreement — your “BATNA.” For franchisees, this means honestly assessing the cost, duration, and likelihood of success of litigation, and the impact of an ongoing dispute on the day-to-day operation of your business. For franchisors, it means weighing the reputational and network-wide consequences of a failed mediation, the cost of defending formal proceedings, and the precedent that any court outcome might set across the franchise system.

Obtain legal advice before the session. While legal representation is not required in mediation, obtaining independent advice from a franchise-experienced lawyer before the session ensures you understand your legal position and can identify where compromise is commercially sensible and where your rights should be firmly maintained.

Attend with decision-making authority. A common reason franchise mediations stall is that one party — typically the franchisor — attends without the authority to make binding commitments. Ensure the person attending has the mandate to agree to terms. For corporate franchisors, this generally means sending a senior executive with board authority, not a junior manager who needs to “take it back for approval.”

When Mediation Is Not Sufficient

While mediation resolves the significant majority of franchise disputes, it is not always the final step. If a dispute involves alleged breaches of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, such as unconscionable conduct, misleading or deceptive conduct, or anti-competitive behaviour, the ACCC may take enforcement action independently. If a franchisor refuses to engage with ADR despite the ASBFEO’s intervention and the threat of public naming, court proceedings may become necessary. And in urgent matters — such as a threatened wrongful termination or an unenforceable restraint of trade — interim court orders may be needed to preserve the status quo while mediation is arranged.

Even in these circumstances, mediation frequently plays a complementary role. Courts routinely refer franchise disputes to mediation, and data from the Federal Court of Australia and state supreme courts consistently shows that over 90 per cent of mediated commercial disputes reach settlement, whether on the day or shortly after.

Protecting Your Franchise Investment

Whether you are a franchisor building a national network or a franchisee who has committed your capital, career, and ambition to a franchise business, disputes are a commercial reality. The question is not whether they will arise, but how effectively you manage them when they do. The Franchising Code of Conduct provides a clear, structured pathway that prioritises mediation over litigation. The strengthened 2025 Code, with its expanded ASBFEO powers, multi-party mediation provisions, increased penalties, and new franchisee protections, sends an unambiguous message: the Australian regulatory framework expects franchise disputes to be resolved cooperatively, transparently, and in good faith.

At Mediations Australia, our accredited commercial mediators have extensive experience resolving franchise and business disputes. We work with franchisors, franchisees, and multi-party groups across Australia, both in person and online, to help them navigate disagreements constructively and reach outcomes that protect their businesses, their investments, and their commercial futures. Contact us today for a free, confidential consultation.


This article is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For personalised guidance regarding your specific situation, please consult a qualified legal professional or accredited mediator.

Workplace Bullying Complaints: How Mediation Can Help

Workplace Bullying Complaints: How Mediation Can Help

By Mediation, Workplace Mediation

Workplace bullying remains one of Australia’s most persistent and costly occupational hazards. According to data from Safe Work Australia, nearly one in ten Australian workers report being bullied on the job, and the Productivity Commission has estimated the annual cost to the economy at between $6 billion and $36 billion in lost productivity, absenteeism, staff turnover, and compensation claims. Behind those figures are real people — employees dreading Monday mornings, managers navigating increasingly hostile team dynamics, and organisations haemorrhaging talent and morale.

For many of those affected, the formal complaint pathways can feel almost as daunting as the bullying itself. Internal grievance processes may lack independence. Fair Work Commission applications are limited in the remedies they can provide. Workers’ compensation claims address the injury but not the underlying workplace relationship. This is where mediation offers something fundamentally different: a confidential, flexible, and forward-looking process that can address the root causes of bullying behaviour and help rebuild functional working relationships. At Mediations Australia, our accredited workplace mediators help employees and employers across the country resolve bullying complaints constructively, before they escalate into tribunal proceedings, psychological injury claims, or irretrievable breakdowns in the employment relationship.

What Constitutes Workplace Bullying Under Australian Law

Understanding the legal definition of workplace bullying is an important starting point for anyone considering how to respond to a complaint. Under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), a worker is bullied at work if an individual or group of individuals repeatedly behaves unreasonably towards the worker, or a group of workers of which the worker is a member, and that behaviour creates a risk to health and safety. The two critical elements are that the behaviour must be repeated and that it must be unreasonable when assessed objectively — that is, whether a reasonable person, having regard to all the circumstances, would consider it unreasonable.

Importantly, the legislation explicitly excludes reasonable management action carried out in a reasonable manner. This means that legitimate performance management, fair allocation of duties, rostering decisions, and genuine organisational restructuring do not constitute bullying, even if the employee finds them unwelcome or stressful. This distinction often sits at the heart of workplace bullying disputes and is one of the reasons these complaints can be so difficult to resolve through internal processes alone.

Examples of behaviour that may constitute workplace bullying include repeated verbal abuse or intimidation, deliberate exclusion from workplace activities or information, unreasonable workloads designed to set someone up to fail, spreading malicious rumours, and persistent undermining of a person’s work or professional standing. The behaviour does not need to be identical each time — a pattern of different unreasonable behaviours directed at the same worker can satisfy the legal definition.

Under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 and the model Code of Practice on Managing Psychosocial Hazards, which commenced in 2024, employers have a positive duty to identify, assess, and control psychosocial risks in the workplace. Conflict and poor workplace relationships are specifically listed among the 17 identified psychosocial hazards. This means that failing to address bullying is not merely a human resources issue — it is a work health and safety compliance obligation that can attract significant penalties.

The Limitations of Formal Complaint Pathways

When an employee experiences workplace bullying, several formal avenues are available. Each has its place, but each also has significant limitations that mediation can help address.

Internal Grievance Processes

Most organisations have internal complaint or grievance procedures, and these should generally be the first port of call. However, internal processes often suffer from real or perceived conflicts of interest, particularly when the alleged bully is a senior manager or when the HR function is closely aligned with the leadership team. Employees may fear retaliation, doubt that the investigation will be impartial, or feel that the process is designed to protect the organisation rather than resolve their complaint. Even when investigations are thorough and fair, they tend to produce findings and recommendations rather than genuine resolution of the interpersonal conflict that gave rise to the complaint.

Fair Work Commission Stop Bullying Orders

Under Part 6-4B of the Fair Work Act 2009, a worker who believes they have been bullied at work can apply to the Fair Work Commission for an order to stop the bullying. The Commission must begin dealing with the application within 14 days. If satisfied that the worker has been bullied and that there is a risk the bullying will continue, the Commission may make any order it considers appropriate to prevent the bullying from continuing.

However, there are important limitations. The Commission cannot order the payment of compensation — no monetary remedy is available through this pathway. The applicant must still be employed by the organisation at the time of the application, meaning that workers who have already resigned or been dismissed cannot use this mechanism (though they may have recourse to unfair dismissal or general protections claims). The process can also be adversarial, with formal hearings and cross-examination of witnesses, which can further damage already strained workplace relationships.

The FWC itself recognises these constraints. In practice, the Commission frequently directs bullying applications to conciliation or mediation before proceeding to a formal hearing. This reflects the understanding that many bullying complaints are better resolved through facilitated dialogue than through quasi-judicial determination.

Workers’ Compensation Claims

Psychological injury claims arising from workplace bullying have been rising steadily across Australian jurisdictions. Comcare data shows that mental stress claims, while representing only around 7 per cent of all claims, account for approximately 27 per cent of total claims costs — with the average psychological injury claim costing around $115,000, significantly more than the average physical injury. Workers’ compensation addresses the injury sustained by the worker, but it does not resolve the underlying workplace dynamics, hold anyone accountable for their behaviour, or create conditions for a safe return to work. In many cases, a workers’ compensation claim runs in parallel with, rather than instead of, a need for dispute resolution.

How Mediation Addresses Workplace Bullying Differently

Mediation offers a fundamentally different approach to resolving bullying complaints. Rather than determining fault, imposing penalties, or issuing binding orders, mediation creates a structured environment in which the people involved can address what happened, understand its impact, and develop practical agreements for how they will work together going forward — or, where necessary, agree on terms for a respectful separation.

Addressing Root Causes, Not Just Symptoms

Workplace bullying rarely occurs in a vacuum. It often emerges from poor communication patterns, unclear role boundaries, management styles that lack self-awareness, organisational cultures that tolerate or reward aggressive behaviour, or the cumulative stress of restructuring and change. Formal complaint processes tend to focus narrowly on whether specific incidents meet the legal definition of bullying. Mediation, by contrast, allows a broader exploration of the circumstances that contributed to the conflict. This means the resolution is more likely to address the systemic issues, not just the presenting complaint.

Preserving the Employment Relationship

One of the most significant advantages of mediation is its capacity to preserve working relationships. In many bullying cases, the complainant does not actually want the other person dismissed or punished — they want the behaviour to stop and to feel safe and respected at work. Mediation provides a space to communicate this directly, for the other party to hear the impact of their behaviour, and for both parties to agree on specific changes going forward. This is particularly important in small teams, regional workplaces, or specialised industries where the parties may have limited alternative employment options and a genuine interest in finding a workable path forward.

Confidentiality

Unlike tribunal proceedings, which may result in published decisions, mediation is entirely confidential. Nothing said during the mediation can be used in subsequent legal proceedings without the consent of both parties. This confidentiality encourages honest and open communication, allows parties to make concessions without fear that those concessions will be held against them, and protects both the complainant and the respondent from the professional and reputational damage that can accompany public proceedings.

Speed and Cost-Effectiveness

The Fair Work Commission’s 2023–24 annual report revealed a record 40,188 applications in a single year — a 27 per cent increase on the prior period. Against this backdrop, formal tribunal processes inevitably involve delays. Mediation, by comparison, can typically be arranged within one to two weeks and concluded in a single session. The cost of mediation is a fraction of what either party would spend on legal representation for tribunal proceedings, and the time away from productive work is measured in hours rather than weeks or months.

Empowerment and Ownership of Outcomes

In formal proceedings, outcomes are imposed by a third party — the investigator, the tribunal member, or the judge. In mediation, the parties themselves craft the solution. Research consistently shows that agreements reached through genuine participation are more durable and more likely to be complied with than outcomes imposed externally. When both parties have had a meaningful say in the resolution, they are more invested in making it work.

When Mediation Is Appropriate for Bullying Complaints

Mediation is not appropriate for every bullying situation, and a responsible mediator will always assess suitability before proceeding. Mediation is generally well suited to bullying complaints where the parties have an ongoing working relationship that both wish or need to maintain, where the behaviour may stem from miscommunication, cultural differences, or management style issues rather than deliberate malice, where the power imbalance between the parties can be managed through skilled facilitation, where both parties are willing to participate voluntarily and in good faith, and where there is no immediate risk to physical safety.

Mediation may not be appropriate where the alleged bullying involves criminal conduct such as assault or serious threats, where there is such a significant power imbalance that one party cannot meaningfully participate, where one party is unwilling to engage or has demonstrated a pattern of using processes manipulatively, or where the organisation needs a formal finding for compliance or disciplinary purposes.

Even in cases where a formal investigation is necessary, mediation can play a valuable complementary role — either before the investigation to attempt early resolution, or after the investigation to help implement findings and rebuild the workplace relationship. This dual approach is increasingly recognised by workplace mediators and HR professionals as best practice.

What the Mediation Process Looks Like for Bullying Complaints

The mediation process for a workplace bullying complaint follows a structured but flexible format designed to ensure safety, fairness, and the best chance of reaching a sustainable agreement.

Intake and Suitability Assessment

The mediator conducts confidential individual sessions with each party before the joint mediation. During these sessions, the mediator assesses whether mediation is appropriate, identifies any safety concerns, explains the process and ground rules, and begins to understand each party’s perspective and interests. If the mediator determines that mediation is not appropriate — for example, due to safety risks or an unwillingness to participate genuinely — they will decline to proceed and may recommend alternative pathways.

The Mediation Session

The joint session begins with the mediator setting the framework: explaining confidentiality, confirming the voluntary nature of the process, and establishing ground rules for respectful communication. Each party is given an uninterrupted opportunity to share their perspective. The mediator then facilitates a structured conversation, guiding the parties through the issues, helping them understand each other’s experience, and supporting them in generating options for resolution.

Private sessions (caucuses) are used throughout the process, allowing each party to speak candidly with the mediator, explore their underlying interests, and consider proposals without the pressure of the other party’s immediate presence. In bullying cases, private sessions are particularly important for managing emotional intensity and ensuring that both parties feel heard and safe.

Agreement and Follow-Up

If the parties reach agreement, the mediator assists in documenting the terms. A workplace bullying mediation agreement might include specific behavioural commitments from one or both parties, changes to reporting lines, team structures, or communication protocols, agreements about performance management processes, a plan for ongoing support such as coaching or counselling, a review date to assess whether the agreed changes are working, and confidentiality obligations regarding the complaint and its resolution.

The resulting agreement, while not a court order, is a binding contract between the parties. Mediations Australia can help ensure that agreements are properly documented and enforceable, providing both parties with confidence that their commitments will be honoured.

The Employer’s Role and Obligations

Employers have a critical role to play in both preventing bullying and facilitating its resolution. Under the model Work Health and Safety laws and the 2024 Code of Practice on Managing Psychosocial Hazards, employers must proactively identify and manage psychosocial risks — including workplace conflict and bullying — as part of their health and safety obligations. Waiting for a formal complaint before taking action is no longer sufficient.

Integrating mediation into an organisation’s dispute resolution framework is one of the most effective ways to meet these obligations. By offering mediation as an early intervention when bullying concerns are raised, employers demonstrate a genuine commitment to resolving issues constructively, reduce the risk of escalation to formal proceedings, and protect both the wellbeing of their workers and their own legal exposure.

The Fair Work Commission’s approach to workplace disputes, including its emphasis on conciliation before formal hearings, reinforces the expectation that employers will engage meaningfully in alternative dispute resolution rather than defaulting to adversarial processes.

Support Services and Resources

Workplace bullying can have serious impacts on mental health and wellbeing. If you are experiencing bullying at work and are struggling, the following services can provide support:

  • Lifeline: 13 11 14 (24/7 crisis support)
  • Beyond Blue: 1300 22 4636
  • 1800RESPECT: 1800 737 732 (for workplace harassment involving sexual harassment or gendered violence)
  • Safe Work Australia: Information and resources on workplace bullying prevention and response
  • Fair Work Commission: Information on stop bullying orders and the application process
  • Fair Work Ombudsman: Guidance on workplace rights and obligations

Taking the Next Step

Workplace bullying complaints do not have to end in tribunal hearings, resignations, or fractured teams. Mediation offers a proven, practical, and human-centred pathway to resolution that addresses both the immediate complaint and the workplace conditions that allowed it to develop. Whether you are an employee seeking to resolve a bullying experience, a manager trying to restore a functional team, or an employer looking to meet your psychosocial safety obligations, professional mediation can help.

At Mediations Australia, our workplace mediators are experienced in handling sensitive bullying complaints with the skill, neutrality, and care these matters require. We work with both employees and employers across Australia, in person and online, to find resolutions that are fair, practical, and sustainable. Contact us today for a free, confidential consultation.


This article is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For personalised guidance regarding your specific situation, please consult a qualified legal professional or accredited mediator.

Online Mediation

Online Mediation: How Virtual Sessions Work and Why They’re Effective

By Mediation

In a country where nearly 7.3 million square kilometres separate families, business partners, and neighbours, geography has long been a barrier to resolving disputes efficiently. Online mediation has changed that. What began as a necessity during the pandemic has become a permanent and preferred feature of Australia’s dispute resolution landscape, with the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia now conducting conciliation conferences and dispute resolution conferences electronically by default. Whether you are a separating parent in regional Queensland, an employer managing a workplace conflict across state lines, or business partners who simply cannot be in the same room, online mediation offers a practical, effective, and increasingly well-established pathway to resolution.

At Mediations Australia, our nationally accredited mediators conduct virtual sessions every day, helping Australians across the country resolve family, workplace, and commercial disputes without the delays, travel costs, and logistical hurdles of traditional in-person processes.

What Is Online Mediation?

Online mediation follows the same fundamental principles as face-to-face mediation. A qualified, impartial mediator facilitates structured discussions between disputing parties to help them reach a mutually acceptable agreement. The critical difference is the medium: rather than gathering in a physical room, participants connect through secure video conferencing technology from wherever they are — their home, their office, or even interstate.

The process retains all the hallmarks that make mediation effective. It remains voluntary, confidential, and party-driven. The mediator does not impose a decision but instead guides communication, helps identify underlying interests, and supports the parties in generating options for resolution. The legal standing of agreements reached through online mediation is identical to those reached in person. A mediated agreement can be formalised through consent orders or a binding financial agreement and will carry the same enforceability as any agreement reached at a physical mediation table.

It is important to distinguish professional online mediation — facilitated by an accredited mediator via live video conferencing — from automated online dispute resolution platforms that attempt to resolve matters through algorithms or asynchronous messaging. While automated platforms may suit very simple consumer disputes, the complexity of family law, workplace, and commercial matters requires the human insight, emotional intelligence, and professional judgment that only a skilled mediator can provide. This is a view shared by the Australian Dispute Resolution Advisory Council (ADRAC), which has consistently recognised the irreplaceable value of human facilitation in meaningful dispute resolution.

How a Virtual Mediation Session Works

If you have never participated in online mediation, the process may feel unfamiliar, but it closely mirrors the structure of in-person sessions. Understanding each stage can help ease any apprehension and allow you to prepare for mediation with confidence.

Pre-Mediation Intake and Assessment

Before the virtual session takes place, the mediator conducts individual intake sessions with each party. These are typically held by phone or video call and serve several important purposes. The mediator explains the mediation process, assesses whether mediation is appropriate for the particular dispute, identifies any safety concerns (particularly in family law matters involving family violence), and begins to understand each party’s key issues and goals. This stage is identical whether the mediation will ultimately be conducted online or in person.

Technology Setup and Testing

A brief technology check is usually arranged before the session to ensure each participant has a stable internet connection, a functioning camera and microphone, and familiarity with the video conferencing platform. Mediators will typically provide clear instructions, including how to join the session, how breakout rooms work, and how to use features such as screen sharing for reviewing documents during the session. Most platforms used for professional mediation, including Zoom, Microsoft Teams, and Webex, offer end-to-end encryption and password-protected meeting rooms to maintain confidentiality.

Opening the Session

The mediator opens the session by welcoming the parties, confirming confidentiality obligations, and outlining the ground rules for respectful communication. This mirrors the opening of any in-person mediation. The mediator will typically ask each party to share their perspective on the dispute without interruption, establishing the issues that need to be addressed.

Joint Discussion and Private Sessions

Online mediation uses the same combination of joint sessions and private caucuses (also known as breakout rooms or shuttle mediation) that characterise effective in-person processes. In a joint session, both parties are present in the main virtual room. When the mediator needs to speak with each party privately — to explore interests, reality-test positions, or develop proposals — they move one party into a virtual waiting room or breakout room. This is functionally identical to the shuttle mediation process where parties are physically separated into different rooms, and many participants actually prefer the digital version because the separation feels more complete and comfortable, particularly in high-conflict situations.

Reaching Agreement and Documentation

When the parties reach agreement on some or all of the issues in dispute, the mediator helps document the terms during the session. This can be done through screen sharing, allowing both parties to review the draft agreement in real time. Once finalised, the agreement can be signed electronically or forwarded to each party’s legal representative for review before signing. Agreements reached through online mediation carry the same legal weight as those reached in person and can be formalised into legally binding agreements through the appropriate legal channels.

Why Online Mediation Is Effective

Some people initially worry that the absence of physical presence might diminish the quality or effectiveness of mediation. The evidence, however, tells a different story. Research and practice data from Australia and internationally demonstrate that online mediation achieves comparable settlement rates and satisfaction levels to face-to-face processes, while offering several distinct advantages.

Accessibility Across Australia’s Vast Geography

Australia’s population is spread across an enormous landmass, with significant numbers of people living in regional and remote areas far from major centres where mediation services are traditionally concentrated. Online mediation eliminates geographic barriers entirely. A parent in Cairns can mediate with their former partner in Hobart. An employee in a remote mining community can participate in workplace mediation without taking days off for travel. This is particularly significant given that the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) requires separating parents to make a genuine effort at family dispute resolution before filing parenting applications with the court. Online mediation ensures this obligation can be met regardless of where the parties live.

Reduced Cost for Participants

The cost savings of online mediation are substantial and immediate. Parties avoid travel expenses, accommodation costs for interstate matters, time off work for travel days, and the hire fees for physical meeting rooms. When mediation already costs a fraction of litigation, reducing the ancillary expenses further strengthens the financial case for resolving disputes outside the courtroom. For property settlement disputes where the net asset pool is modest, these savings can be the difference between pursuing resolution and simply giving up — an outcome that disproportionately affects financially vulnerable parties.

Greater Scheduling Flexibility

Coordinating diaries for an in-person mediation involving two or more parties, their legal representatives, and the mediator can take weeks. Online mediation dramatically simplifies scheduling. Sessions can be arranged more quickly, held outside traditional business hours, and broken into shorter blocks across multiple days if that better suits the parties. This flexibility is particularly valuable for working parents, shift workers, and people with caring responsibilities. It also means that disputes can be addressed sooner, reducing the period of uncertainty and stress that often accompanies unresolved conflict.

Comfort and Emotional Safety

Participating from a familiar environment can reduce the anxiety and emotional intensity that many people experience in dispute resolution settings. For parties in family law disputes, particularly those involving a history of controlling behaviour or power imbalance, the physical distance provided by online mediation can create a greater sense of safety and autonomy. Parties can have support people nearby, take a moment to collect themselves without feeling observed, and generally feel more in control of their own space. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia has recognised these benefits, noting in its practice directions that dispute resolution conferences in both family law and general federal law matters will be conducted electronically unless the registrar considers in-person attendance necessary for effective mediation.

Maintained Confidentiality

Confidentiality is a cornerstone of all mediation, and online sessions maintain this protection. Secure, encrypted video platforms prevent unauthorised access. The mediator controls who enters the virtual meeting room. There is no risk of accidentally encountering the other party in a waiting room or corridor — a concern that can be significant in family violence matters. Documents shared during the session remain subject to the same without-prejudice protections that apply to in-person mediation.

Types of Disputes Well Suited to Online Mediation

Online mediation is effective across virtually every category of dispute that benefits from traditional mediation. In family law, it is routinely used for parenting arrangements, property settlement negotiations, child support discussions, and spousal maintenance agreements. The Federal Circuit and Family Court’s default to electronic dispute resolution conferences confirms its suitability for even the most sensitive family matters.

In the workplace, online mediation is particularly well suited to disputes involving parties in different offices, states, or working arrangements. Workplace mediators regularly handle unfair dismissal disputes, bullying complaints, and restructuring disagreements via video, often achieving resolution in a single session. The Fair Work Commission already conducts the majority of its unfair dismissal conciliations online, with settlement rates consistently above 75 per cent.

Commercial and business disputes, including partnership disagreements, contract disputes, and estate mediation matters, also translate seamlessly to the online format, particularly where parties are represented by legal advisers who can participate from their own offices.

When Online Mediation May Not Be Suitable

While online mediation is appropriate for the vast majority of disputes, there are circumstances where it may not be the best option. These include situations where one or both parties do not have reliable access to technology or a private space from which to participate, matters involving serious and ongoing family violence where the safety of a controlled, in-person environment with security measures is necessary, and disputes where parties have significant cognitive impairments that make engagement with technology difficult.

In family law matters involving family violence, mediators have a duty to conduct thorough risk assessments before proceeding with any form of mediation. If you are experiencing family violence, it is important to seek support. You can contact 1800RESPECT on 1800 737 732 or Lifeline on 13 11 14 for confidential advice. Legal Aid services in each state and territory can also provide guidance on your options and safety planning.

A skilled mediator will always assess the suitability of online mediation during the intake process and will recommend alternative approaches, including in-person sessions, shuttle mediation, or a referral to more appropriate services, where online participation would compromise safety or fairness.

The Australian Courts’ Embrace of Virtual Dispute Resolution

The shift toward online mediation is not simply a private sector trend. Australia’s court system has formally embedded virtual dispute resolution into its processes. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, which handles the vast majority of family law matters nationally, now defaults to electronic conciliation and dispute resolution conferences. According to the Court’s case management practice direction, parties are expected to personally attend mediation or family dispute resolution, with electronic attendance expressly included as a valid mode of participation.

The Federal Court of Australia similarly offers mediation for commercial, intellectual property, industrial, consumer, and human rights matters, with virtual participation now standard. State tribunals including NCAT in New South Wales, VCAT in Victoria, and QCAT in Queensland have all integrated online hearing and mediation capabilities into their processes.

The Federal Court’s 2022–23 Annual Report noted a 19 per cent increase in matters referred to mediation compared with the previous reporting period. This growth, combined with the permanent adoption of virtual hearing infrastructure, signals that online dispute resolution is not a temporary measure but a fundamental component of Australia’s justice system going forward.

How to Prepare for Your Online Mediation Session

Effective preparation is the single most important factor in achieving a good outcome from any mediation, whether online or in person. For virtual sessions, there are a few additional considerations alongside the standard preparation steps.

Secure your technology early. Test your internet connection, camera, and microphone well before the session. Use a laptop or desktop computer rather than a phone where possible, as the larger screen makes it easier to engage with documents and read non-verbal cues. Ensure your device is fully charged or plugged in.

Choose a private, quiet location. Select a room where you will not be interrupted and where your conversation cannot be overheard. Confidentiality is a shared responsibility, and participating from a public space such as a café undermines this. If privacy at home is a concern, discuss alternatives with the mediator in advance.

Prepare your documents digitally. Have relevant financial documents, correspondence, parenting proposals, or workplace records saved and ready to share electronically if needed. Organising these in advance prevents delays during the session.

Minimise distractions. Close unnecessary browser tabs and applications, silence your phone, and let household members know you will be unavailable. Treating the session with the same focus and formality as an in-person meeting contributes to a more productive process.

Consider legal advice beforehand. While mediation does not require legal representation, understanding your rights and entitlements before the session helps you make informed decisions. How long mediation takes and what it involves can vary depending on the complexity of your dispute, so professional guidance can help set realistic expectations.

Taking the Next Step

Online mediation has moved well beyond a pandemic-era workaround. It is now a mature, court-endorsed, and highly effective method of resolving disputes that offers genuine advantages in accessibility, cost, flexibility, and emotional safety. For Australians navigating family separation, workplace conflict, commercial disagreements, or any other dispute, virtual mediation provides a practical path to resolution without the delays and expense of litigation.

At Mediations Australia, our team of nationally accredited mediators and family lawyers conduct online mediation sessions for clients across every state and territory. Whether you are in a capital city or a regional community, we can help you resolve your dispute faster, more affordably, and with less stress than going to court. Contact us today for a free consultation to discuss how online mediation can work for your situation.


This article is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For personalised guidance regarding your specific situation, please consult a qualified legal professional or accredited mediator.

Redundancy and Restructuring Disputes How Mediation Can Help

Redundancy and Restructuring Disputes: How Mediation Can Help

By Mediation, Workplace Mediation

Few workplace events generate as much stress, uncertainty, and potential for conflict as redundancy and organisational restructuring. For employees, being told their role is no longer needed can be devastating — triggering financial anxiety, a sense of betrayal, and serious questions about whether the process was handled fairly. For employers, restructuring decisions are rarely straightforward, and the legal, financial, and reputational risks of getting it wrong are significant. In the 2022–2023 financial year alone, the Fair Work Commission received over 11,000 unfair dismissal applications — with disputes over the genuineness of redundancies representing a substantial proportion.

The good news is that most redundancy and restructuring disputes don’t need to end up before a tribunal. Workplace mediation offers a faster, less adversarial, and far more cost-effective pathway for resolving these disputes — whether you’re an employee who believes your redundancy wasn’t genuine, or an employer navigating a complex restructure and wanting to minimise legal exposure.

Understanding Redundancy Under Australian Law

Before exploring how mediation can help, it’s important to understand what the law actually requires when it comes to redundancy in Australia.

Under section 389 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), a dismissal is a “genuine redundancy” only if three cumulative conditions are met. First, the employer must no longer require the employee’s job to be performed by anyone because of changes in the operational requirements of the business. Second, the employer must have complied with any obligation in a modern award or enterprise agreement to consult with the affected employee about the redundancy. Third, it must not have been reasonable in all the circumstances to redeploy the employee within the employer’s enterprise or an associated entity.

If any one of these requirements is not satisfied, the redundancy is not genuine — and the affected employee may be entitled to bring an unfair dismissal claim before the Fair Work Commission.

The Fair Work Ombudsman provides clear guidance on these requirements, and employees who believe their redundancy was not genuine are encouraged to seek advice quickly, as strict 21-day time limits apply for lodging unfair dismissal applications.

The Consultation Requirement

One of the most commonly misunderstood — and frequently breached — elements of genuine redundancy is the consultation obligation. Most modern awards and enterprise agreements contain “major change” clauses that require employers to consult with affected employees before making a final decision to implement redundancies. This means providing information about the proposed changes, giving employees an opportunity to respond, and genuinely considering their input — including any suggestions about alternatives to redundancy.

Consultation is not merely a box-ticking exercise. Recent Fair Work Commission decisions have made it clear that a failure to consult properly — even where the operational reasons for the redundancy are sound — can render the entire redundancy non-genuine and expose the employer to an unfair dismissal claim.

The Redeployment Obligation

The redeployment requirement has become an increasingly significant area of legal risk for employers, particularly following the landmark High Court of Australia decision in Helensburgh Coal Pty Ltd v Bartley & Ors [2025] HCA 29.

In this case, the High Court unanimously held that when assessing whether redeployment would have been reasonable, the Fair Work Commission can conduct a broad inquiry into whether the employer could have made changes to how it uses its workforce — including whether roles currently performed by contractors or labour hire workers could have been offered to permanent employees facing redundancy. The Court stated that the language of section 389 “does not prohibit asking whether an employer could have made changes to how it uses its workforce to operate its enterprise so as to create or make available a position for a person who would otherwise have been redundant.”

This is a significant shift from the previously understood position that employers were only required to consider existing vacant roles. For any business planning a restructure, this decision means that redeployment considerations must now extend to the entire workforce structure, including contractor and labour hire arrangements.

Where Redundancy and Restructuring Disputes Arise

Disputes in this area typically fall into several common categories, and understanding them can help both employers and employees appreciate why mediation is so well-suited to resolving these matters.

The redundancy wasn’t genuine. The most common dispute occurs when an employee believes the real reason for their termination was not operational change, but something else — poor performance management disguised as a restructure, a personality clash with a manager, or even retaliation for raising a workplace complaint. The Fair Work Commission has consistently found that where an employer hires someone else to perform substantially the same role shortly after a “redundancy,” the dismissal is unlikely to be genuine.

Consultation was inadequate. Even where an employer has legitimate operational reasons for restructuring, a failure to follow proper consultation processes can invalidate the redundancy entirely. Disputes frequently arise when employees feel they were presented with a predetermined decision rather than genuinely consulted, or when the consultation period was unreasonably short.

Redeployment wasn’t properly considered. Following the Helensburgh Coal decision, employees have stronger grounds to challenge redundancies where they believe the employer failed to explore all reasonable redeployment options — particularly where contractor or labour hire workers were performing roles the redundant employee could have filled.

Redundancy pay or entitlements are disputed. Disagreements over the correct calculation of redundancy pay, notice periods, accrued leave, or other entitlements are common, particularly for long-serving employees or those with complex employment arrangements. Under the National Employment Standards, redundancy pay ranges from four weeks’ pay for employees with one to two years of continuous service, up to 16 weeks’ pay for employees with nine to ten years of service. Employees with ten or more years of service are entitled to 12 weeks’ pay. However, where an enterprise agreement or employment contract provides for more generous entitlements, disputes can arise over which instrument applies or how specific terms should be interpreted. Employers should also be aware that the Fair Work Commission has the power to vary redundancy pay in certain circumstances — for example, where the employer has obtained acceptable alternative employment for the employee — but only the Commission can make such a determination.

Selection criteria were unfair. When an employer is restructuring and must choose between multiple employees for a reduced number of roles, disputes can arise over the fairness and transparency of the selection process. Employees may question whether the criteria used were objective and relevant, whether they were applied consistently, or whether the process was influenced by personal relationships, favouritism, or unlawful considerations such as age, gender, or the exercise of a workplace right. A robust, documented, and transparent selection process is essential — and where disputes do arise, mediation provides an effective forum for examining these concerns without the formality and expense of a tribunal hearing.

The Cost of Getting Redundancy Wrong

The financial consequences of a poorly handled redundancy can be severe. Defending an unfair dismissal application through to a hearing at the Fair Work Commission can cost an employer tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees alone — and that’s before factoring in the cost of management time, document preparation, and potential compensation orders.

If a dismissal is found to be unfair, the Commission can order compensation of up to 26 weeks’ pay (capped at half the high-income threshold) or, in rarer cases, reinstatement of the employee. For general protections claims — which can arise where an employee alleges they were made redundant for an unlawful reason such as exercising a workplace right — the potential financial exposure is even greater, as these claims are heard in the Federal Circuit and Family Court and are not subject to the same compensation caps.

Beyond the direct financial costs, there are significant reputational and cultural consequences. A restructure that is perceived as unfair by the remaining workforce can severely damage employee morale, trust in leadership, and productivity. High-performing employees who witness colleagues being treated poorly during a restructure are more likely to start looking for other opportunities themselves — compounding the very workforce problems the restructure was intended to solve.

Data from the Fair Work Commission shows that approximately 75 to 78 per cent of unfair dismissal matters settle at conciliation — meaning the vast majority of these disputes could have been resolved earlier, at less cost, had the parties engaged in structured mediation before the matter escalated to a formal claim.

How Mediation Helps Resolve Redundancy Disputes

Mediation is a voluntary, confidential process in which an independent, accredited mediator assists the parties to communicate openly, identify the real issues in dispute, explore options, and work toward a mutually acceptable resolution. Unlike tribunal hearings, mediation is non-adversarial, flexible, and focused on practical outcomes rather than legal technicalities.

Here’s how mediation can help in the specific context of redundancy and restructuring disputes.

For Employees: A Voice and a Fair Process

Employees who feel blindsided by a redundancy often describe the experience as one where they had no voice and no opportunity to be heard. Mediation directly addresses this. It provides a structured, safe environment in which the employee can express their concerns, ask questions about the process, and explore whether their entitlements have been correctly calculated — all without the formality, delay, and adversarial nature of tribunal proceedings.

In many cases, what an employee wants isn’t just financial — it’s acknowledgement, clarity about why the decision was made, a fair reference, or assistance with finding new employment. These are outcomes that a tribunal has limited power to order, but which mediation can deliver with ease. Unlike a formal hearing where the focus is on whether the employer met its legal obligations, mediation allows the conversation to address the employee’s full range of concerns — including the emotional impact of losing their job and their need for dignity and respect throughout the process.

Mediation also gives employees greater control over the outcome. In a tribunal hearing, a Commissioner makes the decision and the parties must accept it. In mediation, nothing is imposed — any agreement reached is one that both parties have voluntarily accepted, which tends to result in higher satisfaction and better compliance from both sides.

For Employers: Risk Mitigation and Faster Resolution

For employers, mediation offers a way to resolve disputes quickly and confidentially before they escalate into costly formal proceedings. Engaging a mediator early — ideally during the restructure process itself — can help identify and address employee concerns before they become formal complaints or unfair dismissal applications.

Mediation also allows employers to negotiate outcomes that go beyond what a tribunal might order. For example, an employer might agree to provide outplacement support, extend the notice period, offer a tailored redundancy package, or provide a positive statement of service — arrangements that resolve the matter entirely and reduce the risk of future litigation.

The cost of mediation is a fraction of what defending a formal claim would cost. Most workplace mediations can be completed in a single session, often within a few hours, compared to the weeks or months it takes for a matter to progress through the Fair Work Commission process.

Preserving Workplace Relationships and Culture

Restructuring affects everyone, not just the employees whose roles are made redundant. The remaining workforce watches closely to see how their employer handles the process. A restructure that involves open communication, genuine consultation, and fair treatment of affected employees — supported by mediation where disputes arise — sends a powerful message about the organisation’s values and leadership.

By contrast, a restructure marked by secrecy, poor communication, and legal threats can destroy workplace culture and trust for years. Mediation provides a constructive alternative that protects relationships and preserves the employer’s reputation as a fair and reasonable workplace.

Practical Steps: Using Mediation in a Restructure

Whether you’re an employer planning a restructure or an employee facing redundancy, there are practical ways to use mediation to achieve a better outcome.

For Employers Planning a Restructure

Engage a mediator proactively. Consider bringing in an experienced workplace mediator early in the restructure process to facilitate difficult conversations with affected employees, particularly where there is a history of workplace tension or where the restructure will affect long-serving staff.

Use mediation to support consultation. Mediation can supplement and strengthen your consultation obligations under the relevant award or enterprise agreement. A mediator can ensure that consultation meetings are conducted fairly, that employees have a genuine opportunity to raise concerns and suggest alternatives, and that the process is properly documented.

Offer mediation as part of the exit process. Where disputes arise over entitlements, selection criteria, or the fairness of the process, offering mediation demonstrates good faith and often resolves the matter before a formal claim is lodged. This can be significantly cheaper than defending an unfair dismissal application.

Document everything. Regardless of whether mediation is used, thorough documentation of the operational reasons for the restructure, the consultation process, and the redeployment considerations is essential. Preparing thoroughly for any mediation session will help ensure a productive outcome.

For Employees Facing Redundancy

Know your rights. Familiarise yourself with your entitlements under the Fair Work Act, your applicable modern award, and any enterprise agreement. Understanding the three requirements for a genuine redundancy — operational need, consultation, and redeployment — will help you assess whether the process was handled properly.

Act quickly. If you believe your redundancy was not genuine, you have only 21 days from the date of your dismissal to lodge an unfair dismissal application with the Fair Work Commission. However, before taking that step, consider whether mediation might resolve the matter faster and with less stress.

Consider what outcome you actually want. Before entering mediation, think carefully about what a satisfactory resolution would look like for you. Is it additional redundancy pay? A better reference? Assistance with retraining or job placement? Clarity about why you were selected? Mediation allows for creative, personalised outcomes that a tribunal process cannot easily provide.

When Mediation May Not Be Enough

While mediation is effective in the vast majority of redundancy disputes, there are circumstances where formal legal proceedings may be necessary. If an employer refuses to engage in mediation, if the dispute involves allegations of serious misconduct such as discrimination or adverse action, or if there is a significant imbalance of power that cannot be adequately addressed in mediation, seeking legal advice and lodging a formal claim may be the appropriate course of action.

It’s also important to note that mediation does not extend the 21-day time limit for lodging an unfair dismissal application. If you are considering mediation but are approaching this deadline, it may be prudent to lodge your application to preserve your rights while simultaneously pursuing mediation as a parallel pathway to resolution.

Take the Next Step

Redundancy and restructuring disputes are stressful for everyone involved — but they don’t have to be destructive. Whether you’re an employer navigating a difficult organisational change or an employee who believes they’ve been treated unfairly, mediation offers a faster, less adversarial, and more cost-effective pathway to resolution.

Mediations Australia’s accredited workplace mediators have extensive experience helping employers and employees resolve redundancy disputes confidentially and efficiently. We work with parties across Australia, both in person and via online mediation, to find practical solutions that protect rights, preserve relationships, and avoid the cost and stress of tribunal proceedings. Our mediators understand the complexities of Australian employment law and the emotional weight that redundancy carries for all parties involved.

Book a consultation today and find out how mediation can help you move forward.


This article is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For personalised guidance regarding your specific situation, please consult a qualified legal professional or accredited mediator.

How Employers Can Use Mediation to Reduce Workplace Conflict Costs

How Employers Can Use Mediation to Reduce Workplace Conflict Costs

By Mediation, Workplace Mediation

Workplace conflict is an unavoidable reality of business life. Wherever diverse groups of people come together under pressure to meet deadlines, manage competing priorities, and navigate complex interpersonal dynamics, disagreements will arise. But here’s the figure that should concern every Australian employer: workplace conflict is estimated to cost the Australian economy between $6 billion and $12 billion every year, factoring in lost productivity, absenteeism, staff turnover, and workers’ compensation claims. The question isn’t whether conflict will occur in your workplace — it’s whether you have a cost-effective strategy to resolve it before it spirals out of control. Workplace mediation is increasingly being recognised as that strategy, offering employers a faster, cheaper, and more effective alternative to formal grievance procedures, legal action, or simply hoping problems go away on their own.

The True Cost of Unresolved Workplace Conflict

Most employers significantly underestimate how much conflict is costing their business. The direct costs — legal fees, compensation payouts, and settlement amounts — are just the tip of the iceberg. The hidden costs are where the real damage occurs.

Research consistently shows that managers spend between 30 and 50 per cent of their time dealing with workplace disputes and interpersonal friction. That’s time not spent on strategy, innovation, revenue generation, or team development. For a senior manager earning $150,000, that equates to $45,000–$75,000 per year in diverted productivity — from just one person.

Staff turnover is another major cost driver. According to the Saratoga Institute, approximately 80 per cent of employee turnover is linked to unsatisfactory workplace relationships, particularly with direct supervisors. The cost of replacing a single skilled employee can reach 50 to 60 per cent of their annual salary when you account for recruitment, onboarding, training, and the months it takes a new hire to reach full productivity. Staff turnover within the first 12 months alone costs the Australian economy an estimated $3.8 billion annually.

Then there are workers’ compensation claims. According to Comcare, psychological injury claims represent only about seven per cent of total workers’ compensation claims but account for nearly 27 per cent of total compensation costs, with an average cost of approximately $115,000 per claim. Many of these claims are directly linked to unresolved workplace conflict, bullying, or harassment.

When you add it all up — the lost productivity, the recruitment costs, the absenteeism, the presenteeism (employees physically present but mentally disengaged), the legal expenses, and the compensation claims — the cost of ignoring workplace conflict becomes staggering.

Your Legal Obligation: Psychosocial Hazards Under WHS Laws

Beyond the financial imperative, Australian employers now face a growing legal obligation to address workplace conflict proactively. The Work Health and Safety (Managing Psychosocial Hazards at Work) Code of Practice 2024 places a clear duty on persons conducting a business or undertaking (PCBUs) to identify, assess, and control psychosocial hazards in the workplace.

Under the model WHS laws, “conflict or poor workplace relationships and interactions” is explicitly identified as one of 17 psychosocial hazards that employers must manage. This includes breakdowns in team relationships, interpersonal conflict, incivility, and poor communication between colleagues or management.

Nearly every Australian state and territory has now adopted these requirements. Failure to manage psychosocial risks doesn’t just leave employees vulnerable — it exposes employers to potential WHS penalties, prosecutions, and increased regulatory scrutiny. In late 2023, a Victorian employer was fined close to $380,000 for failing to adequately identify and address psychosocial risks.

The Code of Practice outlines a four-step risk management process: identify psychosocial hazards, assess the risks they pose, implement control measures to eliminate or minimise those risks, and regularly review the effectiveness of those controls. Importantly, the Code recognises that poor workplace relationships and behaviours may themselves be symptoms of deeper organisational issues — such as excessive workloads, lack of role clarity, or inadequate training — and that effective risk management requires addressing root causes, not just surface-level symptoms.

Having a robust workplace mediation framework in place is one of the most practical and effective ways for employers to demonstrate compliance with these obligations. It shows regulators, employees, and the broader workforce that your organisation takes psychological safety seriously and has concrete mechanisms to address conflict before it causes harm. Mediation directly addresses several of the psychosocial hazards listed in the Code, including poor workplace relationships, poor organisational justice, and the lack of fair and transparent processes for resolving disputes.

What Is Workplace Mediation and How Does It Work?

Workplace mediation is a structured, confidential process in which an independent, accredited mediator helps two or more parties in a workplace dispute to communicate openly, identify the underlying issues, explore potential solutions, and reach a mutually acceptable agreement.

Unlike formal grievance procedures or litigation, mediation is voluntary, non-adversarial, and focused on finding practical, forward-looking solutions rather than assigning blame. The mediator does not make decisions or impose outcomes — instead, they facilitate a productive conversation that empowers the parties to resolve the matter themselves.

A typical workplace mediation follows a clear structure. The mediator begins with private preliminary sessions with each party to understand their perspective and concerns. The parties are then brought together (either face-to-face or via shuttle mediation, depending on the circumstances) for a structured discussion. The mediator guides the conversation, helps reframe issues constructively, and assists the parties in generating and evaluating options. If agreement is reached, it is documented in writing.

Most workplace mediations can be completed in a single day, with many resolving within just a few hours. This stands in stark contrast to formal investigations, grievance processes, or legal proceedings, which can drag on for weeks or months while workplace relationships continue to deteriorate.

Five Ways Mediation Reduces Costs for Employers

1. Resolving Disputes Before They Escalate

The single greatest cost-saving benefit of mediation is early intervention. Workplace conflicts that are addressed promptly — before they escalate into formal complaints, bullying allegations, or legal claims — cost a fraction of what they would if left to fester. Mediation can nip a simmering interpersonal issue in the bud, preventing it from becoming a workers’ compensation claim, an unfair dismissal application, or a costly employment law dispute.

Data from the Fair Work Commission shows that approximately 75 to 78 per cent of unfair dismissal matters settle at the conciliation stage — demonstrating that the vast majority of employment disputes can be resolved without a formal hearing when parties are brought together in a structured, facilitated process. The lesson for employers is clear: the earlier you intervene with mediation, the more you save.

2. Dramatically Lower Direct Costs

The cost of workplace mediation is a fraction of the cost of formal legal proceedings. A private mediation session might cost a few thousand dollars, while defending an unfair dismissal claim through to a hearing at the Fair Work Commission — or worse, a general protections claim in the Federal Circuit Court — can easily exceed $30,000 to $100,000 or more in legal fees alone, not including the cost of management time, document preparation, and potential compensation payouts.

3. Retaining Valuable Employees

When skilled employees feel that their concerns are heard and addressed through a fair process, they are far more likely to stay. Mediation gives employees a voice and a genuine opportunity to resolve issues — which builds trust, engagement, and loyalty. By contrast, unresolved conflict is one of the primary drivers of voluntary resignation, and replacing key staff is one of the most expensive costs a business can incur.

4. Reducing Absenteeism and Presenteeism

Unresolved conflict drives both absenteeism (taking sick leave to avoid a toxic situation) and presenteeism (being physically present but mentally disengaged). A swift mediation that clears the air and establishes workable agreements between colleagues can restore a functional working relationship and get both parties back to performing at their best.

5. Protecting Your Reputation and Culture

Employment disputes that become public — through tribunal hearings, media coverage, or even internal gossip — can cause significant reputational damage. Mediation is confidential. What is discussed stays between the parties, protecting both the employer’s reputation and the dignity of everyone involved. Over time, organisations that invest in mediation develop a culture of open communication and collaborative problem-solving, which becomes a competitive advantage in attracting and retaining top talent.

Building a Mediation Framework for Your Organisation

Smart employers don’t wait for conflict to erupt before engaging a mediator. Instead, they build mediation into their organisational infrastructure as a standard dispute resolution mechanism. Here’s how.

Embed Mediation in Workplace Policies

Update your grievance and dispute resolution policies to include mediation as a recommended step before escalation to formal proceedings. The Fair Work Ombudsman’s best practice guide on effective dispute resolution encourages employers to have simple, fair, and transparent dispute resolution procedures that address issues quickly and effectively. Mediation fits squarely within this framework.

Train Managers in Conflict Recognition

Equip your managers and HR professionals with the skills to recognise early signs of workplace conflict — personality clashes, communication breakdowns, complaints about workload distribution, or changes in team dynamics. The earlier conflict is identified, the more likely mediation will succeed.

Establish a Relationship With an External Mediation Provider

Having a trusted, accredited workplace mediator available on short notice means you can respond to conflict quickly rather than letting weeks pass while you search for a suitable professional. External mediators are often preferred because they bring genuine independence and neutrality that internal HR staff may struggle to provide, particularly in disputes involving managers or senior leaders.

Use Mediation Proactively, Not Just Reactively

Consider using mediation not only when a formal complaint has been lodged but also in situations where you can see conflict building — a team that’s underperforming due to interpersonal tensions, a department struggling with a recent restructure, or friction arising from hybrid work arrangements. Preparing for mediation early significantly increases the likelihood of a successful outcome.

Measure the Return on Investment

Track the outcomes of mediation within your organisation. Monitor metrics such as the number of formal grievances lodged before and after implementing a mediation framework, changes in staff turnover rates, reductions in absenteeism within affected teams, and the number of workers’ compensation claims related to psychological injury. Many employers who implement systematic mediation programs report significant reductions in legal costs and improvements in employee engagement scores within the first 12 months. The data will not only justify the investment but help you refine your approach over time.

Consider the Broader Workplace Culture Benefits

Organisations that normalise mediation as part of their conflict resolution toolkit send a powerful message to their workforce: disagreements are a natural part of working together, and there is a safe, structured, and fair way to address them. This reduces the stigma around raising concerns, encourages early reporting of issues, and builds a culture of psychological safety — which research consistently links to higher team performance, greater innovation, and stronger employee retention. When employees know that mediation agreements are taken seriously and lead to meaningful outcomes, they are more willing to engage constructively rather than resorting to formal complaints or simply resigning.

When Mediation May Not Be Appropriate

While mediation is effective in the vast majority of workplace disputes, it is important to acknowledge that it may not be suitable in every situation. Cases involving serious allegations of criminal conduct, severe workplace bullying or harassment where there is a significant power imbalance, or situations where one party’s physical safety is at risk may require formal investigation and disciplinary action rather than (or before) mediation.

Employers should always conduct a proper assessment before referring a matter to mediation. A qualified workplace mediator can advise on whether mediation is appropriate in a given situation and, if not, recommend alternative approaches.

The Role of Fair Work in Workplace Dispute Resolution

Australia’s Fair Work Commission and Fair Work Ombudsman both play significant roles in workplace mediation and conciliation. The Fair Work Commission provides conciliation services for unfair dismissal and general protections claims, while the Fair Work Ombudsman offers free mediation for workplace disputes about entitlements and conditions.

However, by the time a dispute reaches the Fair Work system, the relationship has often already broken down significantly — and the employer is already facing formal proceedings. Private workplace mediation, engaged at the first signs of conflict, can resolve matters long before they reach this point. For a deeper understanding of how these systems interact, see our guide on the role of Fair Work Australia and workplace mediation.

Take the First Step: Invest in Mediation Before Conflict Costs You More

Every day that workplace conflict goes unresolved, it costs your business money — in lost productivity, disengaged staff, management distraction, potential legal exposure, and cultural erosion. Mediation offers a proven, cost-effective, and legally sound pathway to resolve disputes quickly, preserve working relationships, and protect your organisation’s bottom line.

If your workplace is experiencing conflict, or if you want to build a proactive dispute resolution framework that saves your organisation money in the long run, Mediations Australia can help. Our accredited workplace mediators work with employers across Australia to resolve disputes efficiently and confidentially.

Book a consultation today and take the first step toward a healthier, more productive workplace.


This article is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For personalised guidance regarding your specific situation, please consult a qualified legal professional or accredited mediator.

Why Arbitration Might Be the Best Way to Resolve Your Complex Family Law Dispute

Why Arbitration Might Be the Best Way to Resolve Your Complex Family Law Dispute

By Family Law, Mediation

When a relationship ends and complex financial matters need to be resolved, the traditional path through the Family Court system can feel overwhelming. With wait times for final hearings stretching to two years or more in many registries across Australia, separating couples are increasingly seeking alternatives that offer faster, more private, and less adversarial pathways to resolution. For those navigating intricate property settlements, superannuation splits, or spousal maintenance disputes, family law arbitration has emerged as a compelling option that combines the authority of a binding decision with the flexibility and efficiency that court processes often lack.

If you’re facing a complex financial dispute following separation, understanding how arbitration in family law works could save you significant time, money, and emotional distress while still ensuring your matter receives expert determination.

Understanding Family Law Arbitration in Australia

Family law arbitration is formally defined under section 10L of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) as a process, distinct from judicial proceedings, in which parties to a dispute present arguments and evidence to an independent arbitrator who then makes a binding determination to resolve the dispute. Unlike mediation, where a neutral third party facilitates negotiation between the parties, an arbitrator has the authority to make decisions that carry the same weight as court orders once registered.

The legislative framework governing family law arbitration is comprehensive. Parts VIII, VIIIA, VIIIAB, and VIIIB of the Family Law Act 1975 outline the types of financial matters that can be resolved through arbitration. These include property division between married and de facto couples, superannuation splitting, spousal maintenance, and disputes arising from binding financial agreements.

The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia actively supports arbitration as a legitimate and encouraged pathway to resolution. The Court’s Practice Direction on Arbitration establishes a National Arbitration List that case manages arbitrations requiring court orders to facilitate their effective conduct and manages applications regarding arbitration awards.

Who Conducts Family Law Arbitrations?

One of the key safeguards in Australia’s family law arbitration system is the strict qualification requirements for arbitrators. All family law arbitrators must be accredited by the Australian Institute of Family Law Arbitrators and Mediators (AIFLAM), the national body that maintains professional standards in this field.

To become an accredited arbitrator, practitioners must be legal professionals with at least five years of experience, with a minimum of 25% of their practice devoted to family law matters, or hold accreditation as a family law specialist from a State or Territory legal professional body. Arbitrators must also complete specialist training approved by AIFLAM and maintain ongoing professional development.

Many arbitrators are senior barristers, retired judges, or highly experienced family law specialists who bring decades of expertise to the role. This ensures that parties have their disputes determined by professionals with deep knowledge of family law principles and substantial experience in applying them to complex factual situations.

The Types of Matters Suitable for Arbitration

Arbitration is particularly well-suited to financial disputes arising from relationship breakdown. The different ways to resolve family law disputes include negotiation, mediation, collaborative law, and litigation, but arbitration occupies a unique space for matters that require determination rather than negotiated settlement.

Matters that can be resolved through arbitration include the division of property in family law disputes, including the family home, investment properties, business interests, shares, and other assets. Arbitration can also address the splitting of superannuation between parties, spousal maintenance claims, disputes arising from binding financial agreements, and debt allocation between separating couples.

It is important to note that children’s matters, including parenting arrangements and child custody disputes, cannot be arbitrated under Australian law. These matters remain within the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts, where the paramount consideration is always the best interests of the child. However, when parties have both parenting and property issues, resolving the financial matters through arbitration can significantly streamline the overall dispute resolution process.

The Arbitration Process Explained

The arbitration process begins when both parties agree to submit their dispute to arbitration. This agreement can occur privately, before any court proceedings commence, or the court itself can refer a matter to arbitration with the consent of all parties under section 13E of the Family Law Act 1975.

Once parties agree to arbitrate, they jointly select an arbitrator from the AIFLAM register of accredited practitioners. The parties and arbitrator then establish the procedural framework for the arbitration, including timelines for evidence exchange, the scope of disclosure requirements, and the format of the hearing itself. This flexibility is one of arbitration’s greatest advantages, as parties can tailor the process to suit the complexity and nature of their particular dispute.

The procedural requirements mirror those applicable to court proceedings in many respects. Under the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021, the disclosure procedures in Part 6.2 apply to arbitrations unless otherwise agreed between the parties. This ensures that both parties have access to the financial information necessary to present their case effectively.

A preliminary conference typically marks the formal commencement of the arbitration process, where the arbitrator and parties agree on procedural matters, identify the issues in dispute, and establish a timetable for the exchange of evidence and submissions. Depending on the complexity of the matter, a hearing may be conducted over one or more days, during which parties present arguments and evidence, and witnesses may be cross-examined.

Following the hearing, the arbitrator delivers a written decision known as an arbitration award. Under section 13H of the Family Law Act 1975, this award can be registered with the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, at which point it has the same legal effect as a court order and becomes binding and enforceable.

Key Advantages of Arbitration Over Litigation

The benefits of choosing arbitration for complex family law disputes are substantial and multifaceted, addressing many of the frustrations that parties experience when navigating the court system.

Significantly Reduced Timeframes

Perhaps the most compelling advantage of arbitration is speed. The family court process can take anywhere from 18 months to three years or longer before a matter reaches final hearing. The Australian Institute of Family Studies has noted that Family Court Chief Justice Will Alstergren himself described delays in the system as “unacceptable.” In contrast, arbitration can typically be completed within weeks or a few months, depending on the complexity of the matter and the availability of the parties and arbitrator.

This time saving translates directly into reduced stress and uncertainty for families. Rather than spending years with their financial futures in limbo, parties can achieve resolution and move forward with their lives far more quickly.

Substantial Cost Savings

Litigation is expensive. Parties who proceed to final hearing in family law matters can expect to pay anywhere from $60,000 to $150,000 or more in legal costs. When you consider the cost of family lawyers in Australia, extended court processes multiply these expenses dramatically through multiple interim hearings, extensive document preparation, and ongoing case management requirements.

Arbitration typically costs substantially less because of the streamlined procedures, faster resolution, and reduced number of appearances required. While parties still need legal representation and must pay the arbitrator’s fees, the overall expenditure is generally a fraction of what full litigation would cost.

Flexibility and Party Control

Unlike court proceedings, where processes are governed by rigid rules and court availability, arbitration offers remarkable flexibility. Parties can choose their arbitrator, select hearing dates that suit their schedules, determine the location of the hearing, and tailor procedures to match the specific requirements of their dispute.

This party autonomy extends to the scope of the arbitration itself. Parties can choose to arbitrate specific discrete issues while reserving others for negotiation or, if necessary, court determination. This targeted approach can be particularly useful when parties have largely agreed on most matters but remain in dispute over one or two specific issues.

Privacy and Confidentiality

Court proceedings are generally public, meaning that details of parties’ financial affairs and personal circumstances can become part of the public record. Arbitration, by contrast, is entirely private. Documents produced for arbitration must only be used for the purposes of the arbitration and cannot be disclosed to others without court permission.

For business owners, high-net-worth individuals, or anyone who values their privacy, this confidentiality can be extremely valuable. It allows disputes to be resolved without the exposure and potential reputational consequences that can accompany public court proceedings.

Expert Decision-Making

When parties arbitrate their dispute, they benefit from having their matter determined by a senior family law specialist with specific expertise in the issues at hand. Unlike court, where cases are allocated to available judges who may have varying degrees of experience in family law, arbitration allows parties to select a decision-maker whose background matches the requirements of their particular dispute.

This is particularly valuable for complex matters involving business valuations, trust structures, international assets, or sophisticated financial arrangements where specialised knowledge can significantly improve the quality of the decision.

The Reality of Court Delays in Australia

To fully appreciate why arbitration has become such an attractive option, it helps to understand the current state of the family court system. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia faces significant backlogs that directly impact families waiting for resolution of their disputes.

According to data from the Law Council of Australia, the Federal Circuit Court has struggled to meet its target of disposing 90% of final order applications within 12 months. In some registries, final hearing dates are not available for 18 months to two years or more from the filing of an application. This means that from the time you first lodge your court application, you may wait two to three years before a judge hears and decides your matter.

During this extended waiting period, parties remain in financial limbo. Assets cannot be properly divided, property may need to be maintained jointly despite the relationship having ended, and both parties face ongoing uncertainty about their financial futures. The emotional toll of prolonged litigation should not be underestimated. Years of legal proceedings can affect mental health, strain new relationships, and impact children caught in the middle of parental disputes.

The costs compound over time as well. Each interim hearing, each direction hearing, each exchange of correspondence between solicitors adds to the legal bill. By the time a matter reaches final hearing after two or three years of preparation, the cumulative costs can be staggering and may consume a significant portion of the assets being disputed.

When Arbitration May Not Be Appropriate

While arbitration offers many advantages, it is not suitable for every situation. The process requires the genuine consent of both parties. If one party refuses to participate, arbitration cannot proceed, and court intervention may be necessary.

Arbitration is also limited to financial matters. As noted earlier, disputes concerning children cannot be arbitrated and must be resolved through the court system, where the court maintains its supervisory jurisdiction over arrangements affecting children’s welfare.

Additionally, in cases involving family violence or significant power imbalances between parties, careful consideration must be given to whether arbitration can provide adequate protections. In some circumstances, the procedural safeguards of the court system may be more appropriate. If you are experiencing family violence, support is available through 1800RESPECT on 1800 737 732 or Lifeline on 13 11 14.

Practical Considerations Before Choosing Arbitration

Before committing to arbitration, there are several practical factors worth considering to ensure it is the right choice for your circumstances.

Firstly, both parties must be willing to engage in good faith with the process. While arbitration requires consent, that consent must be genuine and informed. If one party is likely to withdraw partway through or refuses to provide proper disclosure of their financial circumstances, arbitration may not be effective.

Secondly, you should consider the nature of your dispute. Arbitration works best when the issues are clearly defined and the relevant evidence can be gathered efficiently. If your matter involves complex tracing exercises spanning decades, or requires extensive forensic accounting work, you will need to factor in the time and cost of this preparation regardless of whether you proceed through arbitration or court.

Thirdly, consider whether you require urgent interim orders. Courts have the power to make urgent orders protecting assets, requiring the payment of child support or spousal maintenance, and restraining parties from certain conduct. While arbitrators can make determinations on financial matters, some protective orders may still require court involvement.

Finally, think about the precedent implications of your dispute. Court decisions contribute to the body of family law jurisprudence and can guide future cases. Arbitration awards, being private, do not have this precedent-setting function. For most parties, this is immaterial. However, if your case involves novel legal questions where a court ruling might benefit others in similar situations, this may be a factor to weigh.

How Arbitration Awards Become Enforceable

Once an arbitrator delivers their award, either party can apply to register it with the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The registration process is governed by section 13H of the Family Law Act 1975 and the associated court rules.

Upon registration, an arbitration award has the same effect as a court order. This means that if one party fails to comply with the terms of the registered award, the other party can seek enforcement through the court in the same manner as they would enforce any other family law order. The court has extensive powers to ensure compliance, including the ability to make costs orders, impose penalties, and vary arrangements to secure performance.

There are limited grounds upon which a registered award can be reviewed or set aside. Section 13J of the Family Law Act allows for review on questions of law, while section 13K permits the court to vary or set aside awards in circumstances similar to those that would justify varying court orders, such as demonstrated fraud, bias, or where the award has become impractical to perform.

Comparing Arbitration with Other Dispute Resolution Options

Understanding how arbitration compares with other resolution pathways can help you determine whether it is right for your situation.

Family mediation involves a neutral mediator facilitating negotiations between parties to help them reach their own agreement. Mediation is collaborative and preserves party control over outcomes, making it an excellent first step in many disputes. However, mediation cannot produce a binding outcome unless parties reach agreement, which may not be possible in all cases.

Consent orders formalise agreements that parties have reached through negotiation or mediation. They require both parties to agree on terms and then seek court approval. While efficient, consent orders require agreement, which is not always achievable.

A binding financial agreement is a contract between parties that can be made before, during, or after a relationship. These agreements do not require court approval but must comply with strict technical requirements and each party must receive independent legal advice.

Arbitration occupies the space between collaborative processes like mediation and fully contested litigation. It provides a binding determination when parties cannot agree while avoiding the delays and costs associated with court proceedings.

Taking the Next Step

If you are facing a complex family law financial dispute and traditional negotiation has not achieved resolution, arbitration may offer the faster, more cost-effective, and private pathway you need. The combination of binding determination by an expert decision-maker, procedural flexibility, and significantly reduced timeframes makes it an increasingly attractive option for separating couples across Australia.

The first step is to explore whether arbitration is suitable for your circumstances. Speaking with an experienced family law professional can help you understand your options and determine the most appropriate pathway to resolution. At Mediations Australia, our team can guide you through the alternatives available and help you make an informed decision about the best way forward for your particular situation.

Don’t let your dispute drag on for years in an overburdened court system. Explore arbitration and take control of your path to resolution.

Shinohara & Shinohara How the 2025 Family Law Changes Abolished Add-Backs

Shinohara & Shinohara: How the 2025 Family Law Changes Abolished Add-Backs

By Family Law, Mediation

Imagine you’re going through a separation, and your former partner has already withdrawn substantial funds from joint accounts or sold assets without your agreement. Under the old system, you might have expected the Court to simply “add back” those amounts to the property pool, treating them as if they still existed. After the landmark Full Court decision in Shinohara & Shinohara [2025] FedCFamC1A 126, that approach is no longer available.

This decision, delivered on 23 July 2025, has fundamentally transformed how property settlements in family law are determined in Australia. For separating couples, understanding these changes is crucial—not just for Court proceedings, but especially for those seeking to resolve matters through mediation, where the new legal framework directly shapes what outcomes are achievable.

What Were Add-Backs?

Before the Family Law Amendment Act 2024 came into effect on 10 June 2025, the Courts applied a well-established practice known as “add-backs.” This concept allowed judges to notionally restore assets to the property pool even though those assets no longer existed at the time of trial.

The Full Court case of Omacini & Omacini (2005) FLC 93-218 identified three distinct categories of add-backs:

  • Legal fees: Where one party paid legal costs from joint or individual assets
  • Wastage: Reckless, negligent, or wanton dissipation of assets, such as gambling losses or extravagant spending
  • Premature distribution: Early distribution of matrimonial property before formal settlement

The practical effect was significant. If your former partner had spent $100,000 from joint savings before trial, the Court could treat that amount as if it still existed in the pool. The spending party would then receive a reduced share of the actual remaining assets to account for what they had already taken.

This mathematical “fix” provided a relatively straightforward mechanism for addressing perceived unfairness when assets disappeared during separation.

The Family Law Amendment Act 2024: A Fundamental Shift

The amendments to the Family Law Act 1975 that commenced on 10 June 2025 introduced sweeping changes to property settlement law. Among the most significant was the rewording of section 79, which governs how Courts determine property settlements.

Under the new section 79(3)(a)(i), the Court must now identify “the existing legal and equitable rights and interests in any property of the parties to the marriage or either of them.”

The critical word is “existing.” According to the Attorney-General’s Department fact sheet, this language was deliberately chosen to limit the property pool to assets that actually exist at the time of trial—not notional or historical assets that have since been disposed of.

The amendments also codify the four-step Stanford pathway that Courts have traditionally followed, while integrating enhanced recognition of family violence and its economic impacts into the assessment framework.

The Shinohara Decision: Confirming the End of Add-Backs

Background of the Case

The parties in Shinohara had a relatively short marriage of approximately five years. Following separation, they sold investment properties and their former matrimonial home. The proceeds from these sales were used to pay legal fees and other expenses.

By the time of trial, the parties had agreed to record approximately $592,768 as “add-backs” on their balance sheet—$239,992 received by the father and $352,776 by the mother. The remaining pool available for distribution was approximately $589,155 (excluding superannuation, which was to be divided separately).

The primary judge at first instance did not include the notional add-backs in the asset pool, limiting the division to assets that existed at trial. This effectively halved the pool that the parties had expected to divide.

The Full Court’s Ruling

On appeal, the Full Court (Justices Williams, Altobelli, and Campton) delivered a unanimous judgment that, while allowing the appeal on procedural fairness grounds, definitively confirmed the legislative abolition of add-backs.

The Court stated unequivocally at paragraph 121:

“The text of s 79(3)(a)(i) is clear. Only the existing property of the parties is to be identified and only that existing property is to be divided or adjusted.”

This means that if money has been spent, assets sold, or property otherwise disposed of before trial, those amounts cannot be artificially restored to the pool. What exists is what gets divided.

How Dissipated Assets Are Now Treated

While add-backs as a balance sheet entry are abolished, the Full Court clarified that dissipated assets remain relevant—just through a different mechanism. At paragraph 149, the Court explained:

“So that it is clear, s 79 now directs that the categories identified in Omacini pre-amendment that were notionally added back are to be considered in ensuring a just and equitable outcome, either by way of historical contributions, or by way of their relationship to and impact upon the current and future circumstances at the s 79(5) stage.”

In practical terms, this means:

Under section 79(4) (Contributions): The Court can discount the contributions of a party who wasted or dissipated assets. If your former partner squandered $100,000 through gambling, this negatively affected their contributions to the relationship and can result in a percentage adjustment in your favour.

Under section 79(5) (Current and Future Circumstances): The Court can consider how the dissipation of assets has impacted each party’s current financial position and future needs. A party who has already received a benefit from spent funds may have their needs assessment adjusted accordingly.

Practical Implications for Separating Couples

Why This Matters for Your Settlement

The abolition of add-backs has profound implications for anyone navigating property settlement, whether through the Courts or, preferably, through mediation.

Financial decisions now carry permanent consequences. Money spent during separation cannot be mathematically restored. Parties can no longer assume that a mediator or judge will simply “add back” funds to equalise the pool.

Record-keeping is more critical than ever. Without the add-back mechanism, you must demonstrate exactly how dissipated assets should affect contributions or needs assessments. This requires detailed evidence of:

  • When assets were disposed of
  • Whether the disposal was agreed upon or unilateral
  • How proceeds were used
  • The impact on the overall pool composition

Early protective action may be essential. Since assets cannot be notionally restored, parties concerned about dissipation should consider seeking urgent Court orders such as asset preservation injunctions or interim property orders before funds disappear.

Why Mediation Is More Important Than Ever

The Shinohara decision and the 2025 amendments make family law mediation an even more attractive option for resolving property disputes.

Cost-effectiveness becomes paramount. Under the new framework, legal fees paid from joint assets cannot be added back. Every dollar spent on litigation permanently reduces the pool available for division. Mediation typically costs a fraction of Court proceedings, preserving more assets for both parties.

Speed protects the asset pool. Court proceedings can take months or years. During that time, assets can be depleted through ordinary living expenses, legal costs, or deliberate dissipation. Mediation can often resolve matters in days or weeks, capturing the pool at its highest value.

Control over outcomes remains with the parties. In Court, judges must apply the new legislative framework strictly. In mediation, parties retain flexibility to reach creative agreements that acknowledge past asset movements in ways that feel fair to both sides—provided the overall outcome is just and equitable.

Preservation of relationships. The adversarial nature of litigation often exacerbates conflict. Mediation’s collaborative approach helps preserve co-parenting relationships and reduces emotional harm.

At Mediations Australia, our experienced family mediators understand the implications of the Shinohara decision and can help you navigate the new property settlement landscape to achieve an outcome that works for your unique circumstances.

Practical Steps to Protect Your Position

Immediately After Separation

  1. Document the asset pool. Create a comprehensive record of all assets and liabilities as they existed at separation, including bank statements, superannuation valuations, property appraisals, and business accounts.
  2. Monitor financial movements. Keep records of any asset sales, withdrawals, or expenditure by either party following separation.
  3. Consider protective measures. If you have genuine concerns about asset dissipation, seek urgent legal advice about injunctions or caveats on property.
  4. Engage in mediation early. The sooner you commence resolution discussions, the more likely you are to preserve assets for division.

Preparing for Settlement Negotiations

Whether proceeding through mediation or Court, you must now be prepared to address dissipated assets within the contributions and needs framework rather than as balance sheet add-backs. This requires:

  • Evidence demonstrating the timing and circumstances of asset disposals
  • Arguments about how dissipation should affect contribution percentages
  • Analysis of how each party’s current and future circumstances have been impacted

An experienced family mediator can help structure these discussions productively and guide both parties toward mutually acceptable solutions.

Formalising Your Agreement

Once you reach agreement through mediation, it is essential to formalise the outcome to ensure it is legally binding and enforceable. The two primary options are:

Consent Orders: These are orders made by the Court with the consent of both parties. They carry the full force of Court orders and can include property division, superannuation splitting, and spousal maintenance arrangements. The Court must be satisfied that the orders are just and equitable under the new section 79 framework.

Binding Financial Agreements: These are private contracts between the parties that do not require Court approval. Each party must receive independent legal advice, and the agreement must comply with strict formal requirements under Part VIIIA of the Family Law Act.

Your mediator can explain the advantages and limitations of each option and help you prepare for the next steps in formalising your agreement.

Looking Ahead: Adapting to the New Landscape

The Shinohara decision represents a watershed moment in Australian family law. For practitioners, litigants, and separating couples alike, the message is clear: the rules have changed, and strategies must adapt accordingly.

For those entering separation now, the key takeaways are:

  • Act promptly to document and protect assets
  • Maintain detailed records of all financial transactions
  • Choose mediation to minimise costs and preserve the asset pool
  • Understand the new framework when negotiating settlements
  • Seek professional guidance from mediators and lawyers who understand the 2025 amendments

The abolition of add-backs does not mean that fairness is impossible to achieve—only that the pathway to fairness has changed. Through careful preparation, informed negotiation, and the collaborative process of mediation, separating couples can still reach outcomes that appropriately recognise each party’s contributions and needs.

How Mediations Australia Can Help

At Mediations Australia, we specialise in helping separating couples resolve property settlement disputes quickly, cost-effectively, and fairly. Our nationally accredited mediators are fully across the implications of the Shinohara decision and the 2025 Family Law Act amendments.

We offer flexible mediation services including:

  • Online mediation for convenience and accessibility
  • Shuttle mediation where direct communication is difficult
  • Legally-assisted mediation where parties wish to have lawyers present

Our goal is simple: to help you resolve your dispute faster, better, and cheaper than litigation while achieving an outcome that is fair and workable for both parties.

If you are navigating property settlement following separation and want to understand how the Shinohara decision affects your situation, contact Mediations Australia today for a confidential discussion.

How to Separate from Your Spouse or Partner in Australia

How to Separate from Your Spouse or Partner in Australia

By Family Law, Mediation

Every year, approximately 49,000 divorces are granted in Australia, and countless more de facto relationships come to an end. If you’re contemplating or navigating separation, you’re facing one of life’s most challenging transitions. The decisions you make now will shape your financial security, your relationship with your children, and your emotional wellbeing for years to come.

The good news? How you separate matters just as much as whether you separate. With the right approach, you can protect what matters most while laying the foundation for a healthier future. Family mediation offers a pathway that’s faster, more affordable, and less emotionally damaging than traditional litigation—and it puts you in control of the outcome.

This comprehensive guide walks you through everything you need to know about separating well in Australia, including the 2025 family law changes that may affect your situation.

Understanding Separation in Australia

What Does Separation Actually Mean?

Under Australian family law, separation occurs when one or both parties decide the relationship has ended and act on that decision. There’s no formal registration process or paperwork required—you simply need to:

  1. Make the decision to separate
  2. Act on that decision by changing the nature of your relationship
  3. Communicate the decision to your partner

The date of separation is legally significant because it triggers important time limits. For married couples seeking divorce, you must be separated for at least 12 months and one day before you can apply. For de facto couples pursuing property settlement through the courts, there’s a two-year time limit from separation to make an application.

Separation Under One Roof

Financial pressures, housing availability, and family circumstances mean many couples continue living in the same home after deciding to separate. This is legally recognised in Australia as separation under one roof.

However, if you later apply for divorce while still living together (or having lived together during the separation period), you’ll need to provide evidence that the relationship genuinely ended. This typically requires an affidavit from both you and an independent witness—such as a friend, family member, or neighbour—confirming that:

  • You occupy separate bedrooms
  • You no longer share household duties as a couple
  • You’ve told family and friends about the separation
  • Social and financial arrangements have changed
  • The intimate relationship has ended

The Emotional Journey: Understanding the Grief Cycle

Separation triggers a grief response similar to other major losses. Understanding this process helps you navigate it with greater self-awareness and patience.

The Stages of Grief in Separation

Research on grief, including the widely-recognised Kübler-Ross model, identifies several stages people typically experience:

Denial — Initial disbelief that the relationship is truly ending. You might find yourself thinking “this can’t really be happening” or hoping things will somehow return to normal.

Anger — Frustration emerges, often directed at your partner, yourself, or circumstances. This is a natural response to the pain and disruption.

Bargaining — Attempting to negotiate or make deals, either with your partner or internally. “If only we had…” or “Maybe if I change…”

Depression — Deep sadness as the reality of the loss settles in. This stage often involves withdrawal and difficulty with daily functioning.

Acceptance — Gradually coming to terms with the new reality and beginning to move forward.

Why This Matters for Your Separation

Understanding these stages serves several critical purposes:

Different timelines — If you initiated the separation, you may have already processed much of this grief. Your partner might be encountering it for the first time when you raise the topic. This emotional gap can create significant friction if not acknowledged.

Better communication — Recognising which stage you or your partner are experiencing helps you choose appropriate timing for important conversations and decisions.

Avoiding escalation — Actions taken during the anger phase can permanently damage co-parenting relationships and complicate negotiations. Awareness allows you to pause when emotions are running high.

Realistic expectations — Grief isn’t linear. You might feel you’ve reached acceptance, then find yourself unexpectedly back in anger or sadness. This is normal.

Your First Steps: Practical Preparation

Gather Essential Information

Before having the separation conversation or making any major decisions, take time to understand your situation:

Financial documents:

  • Recent tax returns for both parties
  • Bank statements (joint and individual)
  • Superannuation statements
  • Mortgage documents and property valuations
  • Vehicle registrations
  • Credit card statements and loan documents
  • Business financial records (if applicable)
  • Investment portfolios

Personal documents:

  • Birth certificates (yours and any children)
  • Marriage certificate
  • Passports
  • Medicare cards
  • Insurance policies
  • Wills and powers of attorney

This isn’t about hiding information—full financial disclosure is now a statutory requirement under the Family Law Act 1975 following the June 2025 amendments. However, understanding your financial position helps you make informed decisions and ensures important documents don’t go missing during an emotionally charged time.

Seek Support Early

Separation affects every aspect of your life. Building your support network early makes the journey significantly more manageable:

Personal support:

  • Trusted friends and family members
  • Support groups for separating couples
  • Online communities for people in similar situations

Professional support:

The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia recognises that separation is one of the most stressful life events and provides links to mental health resources. Services like Beyond Blue (1300 22 4636), Lifeline (13 11 14), and MensLine Australia (1300 78 99 78) offer 24/7 support.

Update Your Will and Estate Planning

Many people don’t realise that your will doesn’t automatically change when you separate. If something happened to you before your divorce is finalised, your estranged spouse could still inherit under your current will or intestacy laws.

Priority tasks include:

  • Reviewing and updating your will
  • Checking superannuation beneficiary nominations
  • Reviewing powers of attorney
  • Updating insurance beneficiaries

The Conversation: How to Tell Your Partner

How you communicate about separation sets the tone for everything that follows.

Timing and Setting

Choose a time when:

  • You won’t be interrupted
  • Neither of you needs to rush off afterwards
  • Children aren’t present
  • You’re both relatively calm and rested
  • Important decisions don’t need to be made immediately afterward

What to Say

Be honest but compassionate. Avoid blame language and focus on your own feelings and decisions:

Instead of: “You’ve made this marriage impossible.” Try: “I’ve come to the decision that our relationship isn’t working for me.”

Instead of: “You never made any effort.” Try: “I believe we want different things from life.”

Be prepared that your partner may:

  • Be shocked and need time to process
  • React with anger or denial
  • Want to discuss it extensively
  • Ask for time to respond

If You’re on the Receiving End

Finding out your partner wants to separate can be devastating, even if you sensed problems in the relationship. Give yourself permission to:

  • Ask for time to process before discussing details
  • Seek support from friends, family, or a counsellor
  • Request a follow-up conversation once the initial shock subsides

Resolving Disputes: Why Mediation Should Be Your First Choice

Once you’ve decided to separate, you’ll need to resolve practical matters including:

You have several pathways available, but mediation consistently delivers better outcomes for separating families.

The Cost of Going to Court

The Federal Circuit and Family Court itself states that “court proceedings should be a last resort” and expects parties to make genuine attempts at dispute resolution. Here’s why:

Financial impact:

  • Family law litigation typically costs $50,000 to $200,000 or more per party
  • Contested matters can take two to four years to resolve
  • Court filing fees alone exceed $400 for initiating applications
  • Expert reports, barristers, and multiple hearing dates add substantially to costs

Emotional toll:

  • Adversarial processes encourage conflict rather than cooperation
  • Court delays mean years of uncertainty
  • Public records of family disputes
  • Damaged relationships between parents affect children long-term

Loss of control:

  • A judge who doesn’t know your family makes binding decisions
  • Outcomes may not suit either party’s preferences
  • Creative solutions that work for your specific situation aren’t available

The Mediation Advantage

Family dispute resolution (FDR) offers a fundamentally different approach:

You stay in control — Rather than having a judge impose decisions, you and your former partner work together to create solutions that fit your family’s unique needs.

Faster resolution — Most mediated agreements are reached in one to three sessions, compared to years of court proceedings.

Significant cost savings — Mediation typically costs a fraction of litigation, preserving family resources for the future.

Confidential process — Unlike court proceedings, mediation discussions remain private.

Better long-term relationships — The collaborative nature of mediation helps establish healthier communication patterns for ongoing co-parenting.

Higher compliance — People are far more likely to follow through on agreements they helped create than orders imposed by a court.

When Mediation is Required

Under section 60I of the Family Law Act 1975, you must attempt family dispute resolution before applying to court for parenting orders, unless an exemption applies. Exemptions include situations involving:

  • Family violence or child abuse allegations
  • Urgent matters requiring immediate court intervention
  • Risk of harm to a child or party

An accredited FDR practitioner can assess whether mediation is appropriate for your circumstances and issue a Section 60I certificate if needed for court.

What Happens in Mediation?

The mediation process typically follows these stages:

Intake and assessment — The mediator meets with each party separately to understand the issues, assess suitability for mediation, and screen for family violence or other safety concerns.

Joint session(s) — Both parties meet with the mediator (either in person, online, or via shuttle mediation if face-to-face isn’t appropriate). The mediator facilitates discussion, helps identify interests and needs, and guides you toward mutually acceptable solutions.

Agreement — If you reach agreement, the mediator documents the terms. This can form the basis of a parenting plan, or be formalised through consent orders or a binding financial agreement.

Key Decisions: Children

If you have children, their wellbeing must be your paramount consideration. Australian family law uses this exact phrase—”the best interests of the child” is the overriding principle in all parenting decisions.

Creating a Parenting Plan

A parenting plan is a written agreement between parents covering:

  • Where children will live
  • How time will be shared between parents
  • How decisions about education, health, and religion will be made
  • Communication arrangements (phone, video calls)
  • Arrangements for special occasions (birthdays, holidays, school events)
  • Handover logistics
  • How changes to arrangements will be managed

While parenting plans aren’t legally enforceable in themselves, they’re recognised under the Family Law Act and demonstrate your commitment to cooperative co-parenting. Many families find them sufficient for managing ongoing arrangements.

Parenting Orders

For situations requiring legally binding arrangements, parenting orders made by a court (including consent orders agreed in mediation) are enforceable. Breaching a parenting order can result in serious consequences.

Supporting Your Children

Children experience separation differently depending on their age, temperament, and the level of conflict between parents. Research consistently shows that children’s adjustment depends less on the separation itself and more on:

  • The level of ongoing conflict they’re exposed to
  • The quality of their relationship with both parents
  • Stability in their daily routines
  • How parents communicate about each other

Practical ways to support your children include:

  • Never disparaging their other parent in front of them
  • Protecting them from adult conflict and legal proceedings
  • Maintaining consistent routines as much as possible
  • Allowing them to love both parents without guilt
  • Seeking professional support if they’re struggling

Family Relationships Online offers resources specifically designed to help children understand and cope with their parents’ separation.

Key Decisions: Property and Finances

How Property Division Works in Australia

Property settlement doesn’t follow a simple 50/50 formula. The Family Law Act prescribes a four-step process:

Step 1: Identify the asset pool — All assets and liabilities of both parties are identified and valued, regardless of whose name they’re in. This includes property, superannuation, investments, vehicles, business interests, and debts.

Step 2: Assess contributions — The court considers financial contributions (income, assets brought to the relationship), non-financial contributions (renovations, business development), and contributions to family welfare (homemaking, childcare).

Step 3: Consider future needs — Factors include age and health of each party, income-earning capacity, care of children, and the duration of the relationship.

Step 4: Just and equitable assessment — The court steps back and considers whether the proposed division is fair in all the circumstances.

2025 Family Law Changes

The Family Law Amendment Act 2024, which came into effect on 10 June 2025, introduced several significant changes:

Economic impact of family violence — Courts must now specifically consider how family violence (including financial abuse) has affected each party’s financial circumstances.

Statutory duty of disclosure — The requirement to provide full and frank financial disclosure is now embedded in legislation, not just court rules. Non-disclosure can result in costs orders and other consequences.

Companion animals — New provisions specifically address family pets, recognising their emotional significance. Courts can make orders about pet ownership based on who purchased and cared for the animal.

Simplified divorce for short marriages — The requirement for couples married less than two years to attend counselling before divorcing has been removed.

Formalising Your Property Agreement

Once you reach agreement on property division, you have several options to make it legally binding:

Consent orders — These are court orders made with both parties’ agreement. They provide finality and prevent future claims. The court must be satisfied the orders are just and equitable.

Binding financial agreements — Also known as financial agreements or “prenups”, these are contracts between parties. Each party must receive independent legal advice before signing.

Both options require proper legal formalities. Attempting DIY property settlement without appropriate documentation leaves you vulnerable to future claims.

Time Limits

There are strict time limits for property settlement claims:

  • Married couples: 12 months from the date of divorce
  • De facto couples: Two years from the date of separation

If these deadlines pass, you need the court’s permission to proceed—which isn’t guaranteed.

Divorce: The Formal End of Marriage

Divorce is the legal process that ends a marriage. It’s separate from property settlement and parenting arrangements—you can finalise those matters before, during, or after divorce.

Requirements for Divorce in Australia

To apply for divorce, you must demonstrate that:

  • Your marriage has broken down irretrievably (the only ground for divorce)
  • You’ve been separated for at least 12 months and one day
  • One of you is an Australian citizen, resident, or considers Australia home

If you have children under 18, you must satisfy the court that proper arrangements have been made for their care, welfare, and development.

The Divorce Process

Applying for divorce is primarily an administrative process:

  1. Complete the online application through the Federal Circuit and Family Court portal
  2. Pay the filing fee (currently $1,125, or $375 with concession)
  3. If applying alone, arrange service on your spouse
  4. Attend the hearing (often conducted electronically and lasting only minutes)
  5. Wait for the divorce order to take effect (one month and one day after the hearing)

Joint applications, where both parties agree and apply together, are generally smoother as no service is required.

When Professional Help is Essential

While this guide provides a comprehensive overview, certain situations require professional assistance:

You Should Seek Legal Advice If:

  • There are allegations of family violence
  • Significant assets or complex financial structures are involved
  • Your partner isn’t being transparent about finances
  • You’re being pressured to sign agreements quickly
  • There’s a power imbalance in your relationship
  • International elements exist (overseas assets, different nationalities)
  • You need to formalise agreements through consent orders or binding financial agreements

Mediation is Ideal For:

  • Resolving parenting arrangements cooperatively
  • Negotiating property division with goodwill on both sides
  • Maintaining an ongoing relationship for co-parenting
  • Avoiding the cost and delay of court proceedings
  • Situations where both parties can participate safely

Safety First: When Mediation May Not Be Appropriate

Mediation isn’t suitable for every situation. If you’re experiencing family violence—physical, emotional, financial, or psychological—your safety must come first.

Warning signs include:

  • Physical violence or threats
  • Controlling behaviour around money, movement, or communication
  • Intimidation or harassment
  • Coercive control

If you’re in immediate danger, call 000.

For support and information:

  • 1800RESPECT: 1800 737 732 (24/7 support for sexual assault and family violence)
  • Lifeline: 13 11 14 (24/7 crisis support)
  • Legal Aid: Available in each state and territory

Specialist family violence services can help you create a safety plan and understand your legal options.

Moving Forward: You Will Get Through This

Separation is undeniably difficult. The path forward often feels unclear, and the emotional weight can be overwhelming. But with time, support, and the right approach, most people not only survive separation—they discover unexpected positives.

Many former clients describe eventually finding:

  • Greater clarity about their own needs and values
  • Improved mental health after leaving a difficult relationship
  • Better relationships with their children through focused parenting time
  • New opportunities they couldn’t have pursued before
  • The chance to model healthy conflict resolution for their children

The journey through separation isn’t linear. There will be setbacks, difficult days, and moments of doubt. But with each step forward—each decision made thoughtfully rather than reactively—you’re building the foundation for your next chapter.

Take the Next Step

If you’re contemplating or navigating separation, you don’t have to figure it out alone. Mediations Australia provides expert family dispute resolution services across Australia, helping separating couples resolve parenting and property matters efficiently and affordably.

Our nationally accredited mediators understand both the legal framework and the emotional complexity of separation. We offer flexible arrangements including online mediation, shuttle mediation for high-conflict situations, and evening appointments to fit around work and family commitments.

Ready to explore how mediation can help your situation? Contact us today to speak with our team about your circumstances and options.

Binding Child Support Agreements in Australia

Binding Child Support Agreements in Australia. Important 2026 Update

By Family Law, Mediation

Navigating child support after separation can feel overwhelming. While the administrative formula through Services Australia works for many families, some parents prefer to create their own tailored arrangements that better reflect their unique circumstances. A binding child support agreement offers this flexibility, providing certainty and predictability for both parents while ensuring children receive appropriate financial support.

At Mediations Australia, we help separating parents reach child support agreements through family dispute resolution, a faster and less stressful alternative to court proceedings. This comprehensive guide explains everything you need to know about binding child support agreements, including how they work, their legal requirements, and whether they’re the right choice for your family.

What Is a Binding Child Support Agreement?

A binding child support agreement is a formal, written contract between parents (or carers) that sets out how child support will be paid. Unlike the standard administrative assessment calculated by Services Australia, a binding agreement allows parents to determine their own child support arrangements, including amounts that may be higher or lower than the formula assessment.

These agreements are governed by the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 and specifically regulated under Section 80C, which sets out the strict legal requirements that must be met for an agreement to be valid and enforceable.

Key Characteristics of Binding Child Support Agreements in 2026

Binding child support agreements have several distinctive features that set them apart from other child support arrangements.

Flexibility in payment amounts: Unlike limited child support agreements, binding agreements can provide for payments that are less than, equal to, or greater than the formula assessment. This flexibility allows parents to account for specific circumstances such as private school fees, medical needs, or other expenses unique to their situation.

No requirement for prior assessment: You do not need a child support assessment from Services Australia before entering into a binding agreement, unless you wish to include lump sum provisions. This can streamline the process for parents who prefer private arrangements.

Enhanced enforceability: Once registered with Services Australia, binding agreements can be enforced through the child support collection system. They can also be registered with the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia for additional enforcement options.

Limited ability to change: Unlike limited agreements, binding child support agreements cannot be varied once signed. The only ways to end or change a binding agreement are through mutual consent (by creating a new binding agreement or termination agreement), by court order in exceptional circumstances, or upon a terminating event.

Legal Requirements for a Valid Binding Child Support Agreement

For a binding child support agreement to be legally valid and enforceable, it must comply with strict requirements set out in Section 80C of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989.

Mandatory Requirements

Independent legal advice: Both parties must obtain independent legal advice from a legal practitioner before signing the agreement. The legal practitioner must advise each party about the effect of the agreement on their rights, and the advantages and disadvantages of making the agreement at the time the advice is provided.

Legal certificates: The agreement must include a certificate signed by each party’s legal practitioner confirming that independent legal advice was provided. Without these certificates, the agreement will not be accepted by Services Australia as binding.

Written and signed: The agreement must be in writing and signed by both parties.

Eligible carer requirement: To receive child support under a binding agreement, a parent or carer must have at least 35% care of the child.

What Must Be Included in the Agreement

A comprehensive binding child support agreement should address payment amounts (whether periodic, non-periodic, or lump sum), payment frequency and method, specific expenses to be covered (such as school fees, medical costs, or extracurricular activities), the duration of the agreement, and circumstances that may trigger review or termination.

Types of Child Support Arrangements Compared

Understanding the different types of child support arrangements available can help you determine which option best suits your circumstances.

Binding Child Support Agreement

This formal agreement requires independent legal advice for both parents and offers maximum flexibility in setting payment amounts. It can include periodic payments, lump sums, and non-periodic payments. However, it is difficult to change or terminate and requires either a new agreement signed by both parties or a court order.

Limited Child Support Agreement

A limited agreement does not require independent legal advice but must be based on an existing child support assessment from Services Australia. The agreed amount must be at least equal to the formula assessment. These agreements offer more flexibility as they can be terminated unilaterally after three years, if income changes by more than 15%, or by entering a new agreement.

Administrative Assessment

This is the standard child support arrangement where Services Australia calculates the amount payable using a formula based on parental incomes, care arrangements, and the costs of children. It is automatically adjusted when circumstances change but offers less flexibility for bespoke arrangements.

Private Arrangements

Informal agreements between parents that are not registered with Services Australia. While flexible, these arrangements are difficult to enforce if one party does not comply and may affect Family Tax Benefit eligibility.

Payment Options Within Binding Child Support Agreements

One significant advantage of binding child support agreements is the flexibility they offer in structuring payments.

Periodic Payments

Regular payments made weekly, fortnightly, or monthly. These can be managed privately between parents or collected through Services Australia’s Child Support Collect service.

Non-Periodic Payments

Direct payments for specific expenses such as private school fees, health insurance premiums, sporting activities, music lessons, or medical and dental costs. These payments can be made directly to service providers, ensuring children’s expenses are met while reducing the need for ongoing financial interaction between parents.

Lump Sum Payments

A binding agreement can include a one-time lump sum payment, including through the transfer of property (such as equity in the family home). Special requirements apply to lump sum provisions. You must have a child support assessment in place, the lump sum must equal or exceed the annual child support rate, and the lump sum will be credited against your child support liability annually until exhausted.

According to guidance from Services Australia, lump sum credits are indexed by CPI and reduce each year by the applicable child support rate until depleted.

How to Create a Binding Child Support Agreement

Creating a valid binding child support agreement involves several important steps.

Step 1: Consider Whether a Binding Agreement Is Right for You

Before pursuing a binding agreement, consider whether your circumstances genuinely require one. Binding agreements are most suitable when you want certainty and finality regarding child support arrangements, when you wish to include provisions not possible under a formula assessment (such as direct payments to schools or lump sums), when both parties have the capacity to negotiate fairly, and when circumstances are unlikely to change significantly before your child turns 18.

Step 2: Negotiate Terms Through Mediation

Working with an accredited family dispute resolution practitioner can help both parties negotiate fair terms in a structured, supportive environment. Mediation offers several advantages over attempting to negotiate directly or through litigation, including reduced cost compared to legal proceedings, faster resolution, confidentiality, preservation of parenting relationships, and greater flexibility in reaching creative solutions.

At Mediations Australia, our experienced mediators help parents reach child support agreements that prioritise children’s needs while respecting both parties’ circumstances. Learn more about preparing for mediation to get the most from your sessions.

Step 3: Obtain Independent Legal Advice

Both parties must receive independent legal advice from their own legal practitioner. This is a mandatory requirement under Section 80C of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989. Your lawyer must advise you on the effect of the agreement on your rights, and the advantages and disadvantages of entering the agreement.

Step 4: Sign the Agreement and Legal Certificates

Once both parties have received legal advice, the agreement is signed along with the required legal certificates. Each certificate must confirm that the relevant party received independent legal advice before signing.

Step 5: Register With Services Australia

Submit your signed agreement and legal certificates to Services Australia for acceptance. You can do this online through your Child Support account linked to myGov, by post using the Child Support Agreement form (CS1666), or by phone.

Services Australia will assess your agreement and advise whether it has been accepted. Once accepted, the agreement becomes enforceable through the child support system.

What Happens After Your Agreement Is Accepted

Once Services Australia accepts your binding child support agreement, several things occur.

Notional assessment: Services Australia will create a notional assessment, which is the formula-based assessment that would apply if your agreement were not in place. This notional assessment is used for certain purposes, including calculating Family Tax Benefit Part A entitlements.

Collection options: The receiving parent can choose between private collection (payments made directly between parents) or Child Support Collect (Services Australia collects and transfers payments).

Ongoing reviews: While the terms of your agreement cannot be varied, Services Australia will issue new notional assessments every three years or when the amount of child support under the agreement changes by more than 15%. Parents have 14 days to challenge these notional assessments.

How Binding Child Support Agreements End

Binding child support agreements can only be terminated in specific circumstances.

Terminating Events

A binding agreement automatically ends when the child turns 18 (or completes secondary school if they turn 18 during the school year and an extension is applied for), when the child dies, marries, or is adopted, when both parents cease to have at least 35% care and there is no non-parent carer entitled to receive child support, or when either parent or the child dies. For more detailed information, see our guide on when child support stops.

Termination by Agreement

Both parents can agree to terminate the agreement by entering into either a new binding child support agreement that replaces the existing one, or a termination agreement that ends child support obligations entirely. Both options require independent legal advice and legal certificates from each party.

Court Orders to Set Aside

A court can set aside a binding child support agreement under Section 136 of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 in limited circumstances, including fraud or failure to disclose material information, undue influence, duress, or unconscionable conduct, or exceptional circumstances that have arisen since the agreement was made, causing hardship if the agreement is not set aside.

The “exceptional circumstances” ground is notoriously difficult to establish. Courts have interpreted this narrowly, requiring circumstances that are genuinely unforeseeable and cause significant hardship. For example, in the 2020 case of Martyn & Martyn, the Federal Circuit Court set aside a binding agreement where a parent’s business income had declined by 90% due to the COVID-19 pandemic, finding this constituted exceptional circumstances causing hardship.

Suspension Due to Care Changes

Under amendments introduced in 2018, a binding agreement may be suspended or terminated automatically if care arrangements change significantly. Specifically, if the receiving parent has less than 35% care of the child for at least 28 consecutive days or 26 weeks total, the agreement may be suspended or terminated by operation of law.

Impact on Family Tax Benefit

How child support is received affects Family Tax Benefit (FTB) Part A entitlements. The key point to understand is that FTB Part A is calculated based on the notional formula assessment rather than the amount actually payable under your binding agreement.

If your binding agreement provides for less than the formula assessment, your FTB Part A entitlement will be calculated as if you were receiving the full formula amount. This can result in lower FTB payments than you might expect. Conversely, if your agreement provides for more than the formula assessment, your FTB is still calculated on the notional assessment amount.

Understanding these interactions is important when negotiating your agreement. We recommend discussing this with both your mediator and legal advisor to ensure you understand the full financial implications.

Advantages of Binding Child Support Agreements

Binding child support agreements offer several significant benefits for separating parents.

Certainty and finality: Both parties know exactly what is expected, reducing ongoing conflict and providing financial predictability for planning purposes.

Flexibility: Agreements can be tailored to your specific circumstances, including provisions for private school fees, extracurricular activities, and other expenses not easily accommodated under the formula assessment.

Privacy: Unlike court proceedings, the terms of your agreement remain private between the parties.

Enforceability: Once registered, binding agreements can be enforced through Services Australia’s collection mechanisms or through the Family Court if necessary.

Inclusion in property settlements: Binding child support agreements can be negotiated alongside property settlements, allowing for comprehensive resolution of financial matters following separation.

Potential Disadvantages to Consider

While binding agreements offer significant benefits, they also have potential drawbacks that must be carefully considered.

Inflexibility: Once signed, a binding agreement cannot be varied without both parties’ consent or a court order. This can be problematic if circumstances change significantly, for example, if the paying parent loses their job or suffers a serious illness.

Legal costs: Both parties must obtain independent legal advice, which adds to the cost of finalising arrangements.

Complexity: The legal requirements for valid binding agreements are strict. If any requirement is not met, the agreement may be invalid.

Potential unfairness: If there is a significant power imbalance between parties, one party may agree to terms that are not in their best interests or their children’s best interests. The requirement for independent legal advice helps mitigate this risk, but does not eliminate it entirely.

Enforcement challenges: While binding agreements are legally enforceable, actually collecting unpaid child support can still be challenging and may require court action if Services Australia’s collection mechanisms are unsuccessful.

When Mediation Can Help

Family mediation and family dispute resolution provide an ideal pathway for negotiating child support agreements. According to the Attorney-General’s Department, family dispute resolution helps separating parents reach agreements about children and financial matters without the stress, expense, and delays of court proceedings.

Benefits of Mediating Child Support Agreements

Cost-effective: Mediation typically costs a fraction of legal proceedings, leaving more resources available to support your children.

Faster resolution: While court matters can take months or years, mediation often achieves resolution in just a few sessions.

Reduced conflict: Working together with a neutral mediator helps reduce hostility and builds a foundation for ongoing co-parenting cooperation.

Child-focused outcomes: Experienced mediators help parents focus on their children’s needs rather than their own disputes.

Preserved relationships: By avoiding adversarial proceedings, parents maintain a working relationship that benefits children long-term.

How Mediation Works for Child Support

During mediation at Mediations Australia, our accredited family dispute resolution practitioners facilitate discussions between parents to identify children’s financial needs, explore payment options and amounts, address specific expenses such as education and healthcare, negotiate fair and sustainable arrangements, and document agreed terms for inclusion in a binding agreement.

Once parents reach agreement through mediation, they can then obtain the required independent legal advice and formalise their arrangement as a binding child support agreement.

If you would prefer, agreements reached through mediation can also be converted into consent orders for court approval, providing another avenue for formalising your arrangements.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can a binding child support agreement provide for less than the formula assessment?

Yes. Unlike limited child support agreements, binding agreements can provide for any amount agreed between the parties, whether more or less than the administrative formula assessment.

Do I need a child support assessment before entering a binding agreement?

Generally, no. However, if you want to include lump sum provisions in your binding agreement, you must have a child support assessment in place first.

What if my ex-partner refuses to follow the binding agreement?

If your agreement is registered with Services Australia and your ex-partner fails to comply, Services Australia can take enforcement action including garnisheeing wages, intercepting tax refunds, and restricting their ability to leave Australia. You can also seek enforcement through the Federal Circuit and Family Court.

Can I change a binding child support agreement if my circumstances change?

Binding agreements cannot be varied. If you need to change the arrangement, both parties must agree to enter either a new binding agreement (with fresh legal advice and certificates) or a termination agreement. Alternatively, you may apply to the court to have the agreement set aside, but this requires proving exceptional circumstances causing hardship, which is a high threshold to meet.

How does child support affect my tax?

Child support payments are neither taxable income for the recipient nor tax-deductible for the payer. For more information, see our guide on child support payments and taxes.

When does child support stop under a binding agreement?

Child support generally ends when the child turns 18. If the child is still in full-time secondary education when they turn 18, an application can be made to extend child support until the end of the school year. The agreement may also end earlier due to other terminating events such as the child marrying or being adopted.

Getting Help With Your Child Support Agreement

Creating a binding child support agreement that properly protects your interests and your children’s needs requires careful consideration and expert guidance. At Mediations Australia, we offer professional family dispute resolution services to help separating parents negotiate fair and workable child support arrangements.

Our experienced mediators understand the complexities of child support law and can help you work through the issues in a supportive, neutral environment. We focus on achieving outcomes that prioritise your children’s wellbeing while respecting both parents’ circumstances.

Ready to explore whether a binding child support agreement is right for your situation? Contact Mediations Australia today to speak with one of our family mediation specialists. We offer flexible appointment times and online mediation options for families across Australia.

What Happens When Property Values Change Before Your Divorce Settlement in Australia

What Happens When Property Values Change Before Your Divorce Settlement in Australia

By Family Law, Mediation

When you’re going through separation, few things create more anxiety than watching property values fluctuate while your settlement remains unresolved. That investment property you purchased together might have increased by $200,000 since you separated—or perhaps plummeted due to rising interest rates. Either way, you’re likely wondering: who benefits from these changes, and how will they affect what you ultimately receive?

Understanding how Australian family law treats property value fluctuations is essential for anyone navigating a property settlement after separation. The timing of valuations can significantly impact your financial outcome, making it crucial to understand the rules and, importantly, to resolve your property matters as efficiently as possible.

The Fundamental Principle: Valuation at Settlement, Not Separation

One of the most important concepts in Australian family law property settlements is that assets are typically valued at the time of settlement or final hearing, not at the date you separated.

This principle stems from the overarching objective of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) to achieve a just and equitable outcome. Under Section 79 of the Family Law Act, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia assesses the “existing” property interests of the parties—meaning what exists at the time the court makes its determination.

The reasoning is straightforward: the property pool should reflect the most accurate and current picture of the parties’ financial circumstances at the point when their financial relationship is formally severed.

What This Means in Practice

If your family home was worth $1.2 million when you separated in 2023, but is valued at $1.5 million when you finalise your settlement in 2026, the court will generally use the $1.5 million figure. Conversely, if the property has declined to $1 million, that reduced value forms the basis of the division.

This approach applies whether you reach an agreement through family mediation, negotiate directly with your former partner, or proceed to a final hearing in court.

The Four-Step Property Settlement Process

Before examining how value changes affect outcomes, it’s helpful to understand the structured approach courts use when determining property division. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia follows a four-step process:

Step 1: Identify and Value the Property Pool

All assets and liabilities of both parties are combined into a single pool, regardless of whose name they’re registered in. This includes real estate (family home, investment properties, land), superannuation, businesses and business interests, vehicles, savings, shares and investments, cryptocurrency and digital assets, and all debts including mortgages, loans, and credit cards.

Step 2: Assess Contributions

The court evaluates what each party contributed during the relationship. Financial contributions include income, savings, and inheritances. Non-financial contributions encompass renovations, business involvement, and property maintenance. Homemaker and parenting contributions—raising children and managing the household—are equally recognised.

Step 3: Consider Future Needs

Adjustments may be made based on factors like each party’s age and health, earning capacity, who has primary care of children, and ongoing financial needs.

Step 4: Ensure the Outcome is Just and Equitable

The court confirms that the proposed division is fair in all the circumstances. This final step provides flexibility to address unusual situations.

Throughout this process, accurate and current valuations are essential. Outdated figures can distort the entire settlement, which is why valuations are typically required to be no more than six months old when matters proceed to court.

Why Valuation at Settlement Makes Sense

The settlement-date approach serves several important purposes that promote fairness for both parties.

Reflecting Real Financial Circumstances

Property markets—particularly in cities like Sydney, Melbourne, and Brisbane—can shift dramatically over relatively short periods. If values were frozen at separation, one party could be significantly advantaged or disadvantaged by circumstances entirely beyond their control.

Consider this scenario: a couple separates in January when their Sydney apartment is worth $900,000. By the time their matter is resolved eighteen months later, a market boom has pushed the value to $1.1 million. If the separation-date value were used, the party retaining the property would receive a $200,000 windfall that the other party couldn’t share in.

Preventing Strategic Behaviour

If valuations were fixed at an earlier date, a party might deliberately delay proceedings to benefit from anticipated market movements. Using settlement-date values removes the incentive for such tactics.

Courts are alert to strategic delays. In the case of Halstron & Halstron [2022], the Full Court addressed a situation where there was almost 12 months between the trial and judgment delivery. When one party sought to exclude updated property valuations, the Court found this would create an unfair “fortuitous windfall.”

Maintaining Shared Responsibility

Until settlement is finalised, both parties remain financially connected to the assets. Using current values ensures that market-driven changes—whether gains or losses—are shared equitably, rather than arbitrarily benefiting one party over the other.

How Different Value Changes Affect Your Settlement

Understanding the practical implications of value fluctuations helps you make informed decisions about timing and strategy.

When Property Values Increase

An increase in property values expands the overall pool, which typically means the party who doesn’t retain the property receives a larger dollar amount. For example, if a property increases from $800,000 to $1 million and the agreed split is 60/40, the non-retaining party’s share increases from $320,000 to $400,000.

This can create challenges for the party retaining the property, who may need to refinance at a higher amount or find additional funds to pay out their former partner.

When Property Values Decrease

A decline reduces the pool size, meaning both parties share in the loss. If that same property drops from $800,000 to $650,000, the 60/40 split would give the non-retaining party $260,000 rather than $320,000.

While this feels unfair to the party receiving less, it’s equally difficult for the retaining party who now holds a diminished asset—often while still carrying the same mortgage obligations.

The Critical Exception: Post-Separation Contributions

The general rule of shared gains and losses has an important exception. If one party has actively contributed to changing an asset’s value after separation, the court may adjust the outcome accordingly.

For instance, if one party used their own funds to renovate a property after separation, increasing its value by $100,000, the court may recognise this as a post-separation contribution and adjust their entitlement accordingly. Similarly, if one party’s neglect caused a property to deteriorate, this may be reflected in the contributions assessment.

This is distinct from passive market changes, which are typically shared regardless of who retained physical possession of the asset.

Common Causes of Property Value Fluctuations

Several factors can cause property values to shift between separation and settlement.

Market conditions represent the most common cause. Interest rate changes, economic cycles, supply and demand dynamics, and government policy all influence property prices. The significant interest rate increases since 2022, for example, have affected property values across many Australian markets.

Property condition also matters. A well-maintained property will hold its value better than one that’s been neglected. Improvements and renovations can increase value, while deferred maintenance can cause decline.

External factors beyond anyone’s control—natural disasters, infrastructure changes, rezoning decisions—can dramatically affect values in specific locations.

Business assets present particular volatility. A family business might flourish or struggle in the period between separation and settlement, with corresponding impacts on its valuation.

The Case for Resolving Property Matters Promptly Through Mediation

Given that property values can change significantly over time, there’s a compelling argument for resolving your property settlement as efficiently as possible. This is where mediation offers substantial advantages over protracted court proceedings.

Speed and Certainty

Court proceedings for property matters can take two to three years or longer to reach a final hearing. During this time, property values may fluctuate significantly, creating ongoing uncertainty about the ultimate outcome.

Mediation, by contrast, can often achieve resolution within weeks or a few months. Once you reach agreement and formalise it through consent orders or a binding financial agreement, you have certainty about your entitlements regardless of subsequent market movements.

Control Over Timing

In mediation, you and your former partner control when valuations are obtained and when agreements are finalised. This allows you to make strategic decisions about timing based on your assessment of market conditions and your individual circumstances.

In court proceedings, timing is largely dictated by court schedules and procedural requirements, leaving you exposed to market fluctuations you cannot control.

Cost Savings

Legal costs in contested court proceedings can be substantial—often $50,000 to $150,000 or more per party for complex property matters. These costs reduce the pool available for distribution.

Mediation is significantly more cost-effective, preserving more of the asset pool for both parties. The Federal Circuit and Family Court actively encourages parties to attempt mediation before and during proceedings.

Preserving Relationships

If you have children together or ongoing connections, the adversarial nature of litigation can cause lasting damage. Mediation provides a more constructive environment for reaching agreements, which can benefit your co-parenting relationship and your children’s wellbeing.

For detailed guidance on making the most of the mediation process, see our article on preparing for mediation.

What Happens When Your Former Partner Delays

Unfortunately, not everyone is motivated to resolve property matters promptly. If your former partner is delaying the property settlement, you face the risk of ongoing value fluctuations affecting your entitlement.

Courts recognise this problem. If one party unreasonably delays proceedings, this conduct may be considered when assessing contributions or determining costs. However, you need to take proactive steps to demonstrate you’ve attempted to progress the matter.

Options include formally proposing mediation in writing, making written settlement offers, initiating court proceedings if necessary, and applying for interim orders to protect assets if there’s a risk of dissipation.

The court may also “add back” funds if one party has wasted assets during the period of delay—though this is discretionary and depends on the specific circumstances.

Protecting Yourself from Adverse Value Changes

While you cannot control market movements, you can take steps to manage the risks associated with property value changes.

Obtain Current Valuations

When negotiating or mediating, ensure you have up-to-date valuations from qualified valuers. For court proceedings, the Federal Circuit and Family Court generally requires valuations no more than six months old.

Real estate valuations should be conducted by professionals accredited with the Australian Property Institute. Business valuations require specialist accountants or business valuers.

Consider the Time Frame Realistically

When deciding whether to accept a settlement offer, consider how long court proceedings might take and what might happen to property values in that time. A slightly lower settlement now might be preferable to uncertainty over several years.

Address Volatility in Your Agreement

Your agreement can include mechanisms to address value changes. For instance, you might agree to sell a property within a specified timeframe and divide the actual proceeds, rather than basing the settlement on a current valuation that might change.

Document Post-Separation Contributions

If you’re making improvements to properties or maintaining assets after separation, keep detailed records. This evidence will be important if you need to demonstrate your contributions affected the asset’s value.

Seek Strategic Advice

Every situation is different. Obtaining advice early about your specific circumstances helps you make informed decisions about timing, valuation, and negotiation strategy.

Special Considerations for Different Asset Types

Different assets present unique valuation challenges when values change between separation and settlement.

Real Estate

Property valuations can vary significantly depending on the valuer, comparable sales used, and market conditions at the time of assessment. If you and your former partner disagree on property values, mediation can help you agree on a single valuer or a process for reconciling different valuations.

Superannuation

Superannuation balances fluctuate with investment market performance. The value of your super at separation may be quite different from its value at settlement. Under the Family Law (Superannuation) Regulations 2025, specific methods apply for valuing different types of superannuation interests.

Business Interests

Business valuations are particularly susceptible to change based on trading performance, market conditions, and broader economic factors. Expert valuation is essential, and the timing of that valuation can significantly affect the outcome.

Cryptocurrency and Digital Assets

These assets can experience extreme volatility. Clear agreement about the valuation date and methodology is especially important for crypto holdings.

For more information about the factors considered when dividing assets, see our article on what factors are considered when dividing assets in property settlements.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I insist that property be valued at the separation date?

Generally, no. Courts almost always use current values at the time of settlement or hearing. The only exceptions relate to unusual circumstances such as wastage, where one party has deliberately diminished an asset’s value, or significant post-separation contributions. Even then, the court typically adjusts the contributions assessment rather than substituting an earlier valuation date.

What if values change dramatically between reaching agreement and finalising orders?

If you’ve reached agreement in principle but haven’t yet obtained consent orders, significant value changes may warrant renegotiation. Once consent orders are made by the court, they’re generally final, regardless of subsequent value changes. This underscores the importance of moving efficiently from agreement to formalised orders.

Who gets the benefit if I’ve been paying the mortgage since separation?

Mortgage payments made after separation are typically treated as post-separation contributions. However, they’re often offset against the benefit you’ve received from occupying the property rent-free (if applicable). The specific treatment depends on your circumstances.

What happens if my former partner won’t engage in mediation?

While family dispute resolution is required before commencing parenting proceedings, there’s no strict requirement for property-only matters. However, attempting genuine resolution before court is expected. If your former partner refuses to engage, document your attempts and seek advice about your options for progressing the matter.

How long do I have to finalise property settlement?

For married couples, you have 12 months from the date your divorce becomes final to apply to the court for property orders. For de facto couples, it’s two years from the date of separation. Missing these deadlines can mean losing your ability to make a claim, so timely action is essential.

Moving Forward with Your Property Settlement

Property value changes between separation and settlement are a reality of Australian family law. While you cannot control market movements, you can control how quickly and efficiently you work towards resolution.

Mediation offers a pathway to resolve property matters faster, more cost-effectively, and with greater certainty than contested court proceedings. By reaching agreement sooner, you reduce your exposure to market volatility and gain certainty about your financial future.

At Mediations Australia, our accredited family dispute resolution practitioners help separating couples navigate property settlements every day. We understand the anxiety that comes with watching property values change while your settlement remains unresolved, and we’re committed to helping you reach fair outcomes efficiently.

If you’re ready to discuss your property settlement options, contact Mediations Australia today to arrange a confidential consultation with an experienced family mediator.

Separated under one roof

By Family Law, Mediation

Five Factors Separation Assessment

Evaluate your separation evidence strength based on the criteria used by Services Australia and the Family Court

Disclaimer: This assessment is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Results are indicative only. Please consult a qualified family lawyer for advice specific to your situation.

What Does “Separated Under One Roof” Mean in Australia?

Separation under one roof is a legitimate and increasingly common arrangement in Australia. Whether driven by financial necessity, children’s wellbeing, or practical constraints, this living situation is fully recognised by Australian family law and government agencies.

Key Takeaways:

  1. Legal Recognition: Section 49(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 explicitly recognises separation under one roof
  2. Documentation is Critical: Thorough evidence across all five assessment factors strengthens your position
  3. Centrelink Support Available: The SS293 form allows you to claim appropriate single-rate payments
  4. Divorce is Possible: You can divorce after 12 months separation even while living together
  5. Professional Support Helps: Mediation reduces conflict and costs while achieving better outcomes

Separated under one roof is a legally recognised arrangement in Australian family law where a couple has genuinely ended their relationship but continues to reside in the same home. This situation—sometimes called “separation under the same roof” or “living separately under one roof”—occurs when former partners share accommodation despite their romantic relationship being over.

Under Section 49(2) of the Family Law Act 1975, Australian law explicitly acknowledges that couples can be separated while still living together. The legislation states that parties may be considered separated “notwithstanding that the cohabitation was brought to an end by the parties continuing to reside in the same residence.”

According to the Australian Government Social Security Guide, a person living in the same residence as their former partner is considered “separated under one roof” where:

  • There is a genuine breakdown in the relationship
  • One or more parties have no intention to reconcile
  • The separation involves more than physical distance—it requires a destruction of the relationship on a permanent or indefinite basis

This arrangement has become increasingly common in Australia, with financial pressures, housing affordability challenges, and children’s welfare driving many couples to continue sharing a home after their relationship ends.

Why Do Couples Choose to Live Separated Under One Roof?

Understanding why couples remain in the same home after separation helps contextualise this growing trend in Australian family law.

Financial Considerations

The cost of living crisis has made separation under one roof more prevalent than ever. According to the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI), rental affordability has declined significantly, with many Australians spending more than 30% of their income on housing. For separating couples, the prospect of suddenly maintaining two households can be financially devastating.

Common financial reasons include:

  • Inability to afford separate rental properties or mortgage payments
  • Protecting joint assets during property settlement negotiations
  • Maintaining financial stability for children’s education and activities
  • Avoiding the significant costs associated with moving and establishing new households
  • Preserving retirement savings and superannuation during the transition period

Children’s Wellbeing

Many parents prioritise their children’s stability during separation. Remaining in the family home allows children to:

  • Continue attending their current school without disruption
  • Maintain friendships and extracurricular activities
  • Access both parents more easily during the transition
  • Experience less upheaval during an already difficult time
  • Remain close to extended family support networks

Practical Limitations

Sometimes circumstances simply prevent immediate physical separation. These situations include:

  • Waiting for property to sell before having funds to move
  • One party requiring care due to illness or disability
  • Seasonal work or employment constraints
  • Immigration status complications
  • Regional or remote locations with limited housing options

Amicable Relationships

Some couples maintain respectful relationships after separation and find living together manageable or even preferable as a transitional arrangement. This is particularly common where:

  • The separation is mutual and without significant conflict
  • Both parties are committed to co-parenting effectively
  • There is trust and respect despite the relationship ending
  • Financial benefits outweigh the personal challenges

Legal Recognition of Separation Under One Roof in Australia

Australian family law provides clear frameworks for recognising separation while living together, though specific requirements vary depending on the legal process involved.

Family Law Act 1975 Requirements

The Family Law Act 1975 governs divorce and family law matters in Australia. For divorce applications, you must demonstrate a 12-month separation period, which can include time spent separated under one roof.

According to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, to prove separation under one roof, you need to show:

  1. Date of separation – A specific date when the relationship ended
  2. Communication of separation – That one or both parties communicated the relationship was over
  3. Changed living arrangements – How domestic arrangements changed after separation
  4. Financial independence – Separate management of finances
  5. Social separation – Independent social lives and activities
  6. No reconciliation – No resumption of the marital relationship

State-Specific Considerations

While family law is primarily federal jurisdiction in Australia, some variations exist:

Western Australia operates its own Family Court with slightly different procedures. The Family Court of Western Australia provides specific guidelines for separation under one roof documentation.

All Other States and Territories fall under the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia’s jurisdiction, with consistent requirements for proving separation while living together.

How to Prove Separation Under One Roof

Proving you are genuinely separated while living together requires documented evidence across multiple areas of your life. Courts and government agencies assess several factors to determine whether separation has occurred.

The Five Factors Assessed by Services Australia

According to the Social Security Guide, decision-makers assess five key factors:

1. Financial Aspects

  • Separate bank accounts and financial management
  • Individual responsibility for personal expenses
  • No joint financial decision-making
  • Separate tax affairs and lodgement
  • Independent superannuation and insurance management

2. Social Aspects

  • Separate social activities and friendships
  • Not attending events together as a couple
  • Independent relationships with family members
  • Separate holiday and travel arrangements
  • Not presenting as a couple publicly

3. Sexual Relationship

  • No ongoing intimate relationship
  • Sleeping in separate bedrooms
  • No shared bedroom or bed

4. Nature of the Household

  • Separate living spaces within the home where possible
  • Individual responsibility for household tasks
  • Separate meal preparation and eating arrangements
  • Independent daily routines

5. Nature of Commitment

  • No intention to reconcile
  • Clear communication that the relationship has ended
  • Planning for permanent separation
  • No ongoing emotional partnership

Evidence Required for Separation Under One Roof

Strong documentation significantly increases the likelihood of successful applications to courts and government agencies.

Essential Documents:

  • Separate bank account statements (minimum 3 months)
  • Individual utility accounts or evidence of bill-splitting arrangements
  • Separate mobile phone contracts
  • Individual health insurance policies
  • Updated wills removing former partner as beneficiary
  • Separate car registrations and insurance
  • Evidence of notifying government agencies of relationship status change

Supporting Evidence:

  • Statutory declarations from both parties
  • Witness statements from family or friends
  • Photos showing separate living arrangements
  • Correspondence demonstrating separation (emails, text messages)
  • Receipts showing independent purchases
  • Evidence of separate social activities

Witness Statements and Affidavits

For divorce applications, the Federal Circuit and Family Court requires specific affidavit evidence when separation under one roof applies.

Applicant’s Affidavit Must Address:

  1. The facts establishing you separated on the specific date claimed
  2. Why you continued sharing a home despite the marriage ending
  3. Your intention regarding future living arrangements
  4. How the relationship changed after separation (sleeping arrangements, domestic duties, sexual relations)
  5. Living arrangements for any children under 18
  6. Changes to financial arrangements
  7. Changes to social and family activities
  8. Who was informed about the separation and when
  9. What government departments were notified

Third-Party Affidavit Requirements:

A supporting affidavit from an independent third party (friend, family member, or neighbour) must:

  • State their relationship to each party
  • Provide evidence based on direct observation (not hearsay)
  • Describe the circumstances allowing them to make observations
  • Corroborate the claim of separation under one roof

Centrelink and Separated Under One Roof: SS293 Form Guide

If you receive Centrelink payments, you must notify Services Australia of your separation to ensure you receive the correct payment rate. Being assessed as single rather than partnered typically results in higher payment rates.

Understanding the SS293 Form

The Relationship Details – Separated Under One Roof Form (SS293) is the official form for notifying Centrelink that you are separated but still living with your former partner.

Key Information About the SS293:

  • Both you and your former partner must complete the form (unless safety concerns apply)
  • The form assesses all five relationship factors mentioned above
  • Centrelink may request additional information or conduct interviews
  • Your former partner’s form responses should align with yours
  • Inconsistencies between forms may trigger further investigation

Step-by-Step Guide to Completing the SS293 Form

Step 1: Download the Form Access the SS293 form from Services Australia. You can complete it online or download the PDF version.

Step 2: Gather Supporting Documents Before starting, collect:

  • Recent bank statements (3 months minimum)
  • Evidence of separate living arrangements
  • Dates of key events (separation date, notification to family/friends)
  • Details of any children’s living arrangements

Step 3: Complete Your Section Be thorough and accurate when describing:

  • When and why you separated
  • Your current living arrangements
  • How finances are managed
  • Your social activities
  • Children’s arrangements (if applicable)

Step 4: Have Your Former Partner Complete Their Section Your former partner returns their completed form to you for joint submission, unless domestic violence concerns apply.

Step 5: Submit with Supporting Evidence Include:

  • Both completed SS293 forms
  • Supporting bank statements
  • Any additional evidence demonstrating separation

Common SS293 Mistakes to Avoid

Documentation Errors:

  • Outdated bank statements (must be within 3 months)
  • Missing signatures on statutory declarations
  • Inconsistencies between your form and your former partner’s
  • Vague descriptions of living arrangements

Content Deficiencies:

  • Not providing specific dates
  • Failing to explain why you continue living together
  • Insufficient detail about separate financial arrangements
  • Not addressing all five assessment factors

Process Errors:

  • Missing submission deadlines
  • Not notifying Centrelink of changes in circumstances
  • Submitting only one form when both are required

Centrelink Payments Affected by Relationship Status

Your relationship status affects eligibility and rates for:

  • JobSeeker Payment
  • Parenting Payment (Single vs Partnered rates)
  • Family Tax Benefit Part A and Part B
  • Disability Support Pension
  • Age Pension
  • Carer Payment
  • Youth Allowance
  • Austudy

Being correctly assessed as separated can result in significantly higher payments. For example, the single rate of Parenting Payment is considerably higher than the partnered rate.

Divorce While Separated Under One Roof

You can apply for divorce while living with your former spouse, provided you meet all standard requirements and supply additional evidence of your separation.

Divorce Requirements in Australia

Under the Family Law Act 1975, to obtain a divorce in Australia you must demonstrate:

  1. Your marriage has broken down irretrievably
  2. You have been separated for at least 12 months
  3. At least one party is an Australian citizen, resident, or has an ordinarily resident connection to Australia
  4. Proper arrangements exist for children under 18 (if applicable)

The 12-month separation period can include time separated under one roof, but additional evidence is required.

Additional Requirements for Separation Under One Roof Divorces

When applying for divorce with a separation under one roof period, you must file:

For Sole Applications:

  • Your affidavit detailing the separation circumstances
  • A supporting affidavit from an independent third party

For Joint Applications:

  • Each party’s individual affidavit, OR
  • One party’s affidavit plus a third-party supporting affidavit

Affidavit Template Guide

Your affidavit should address these key areas in numbered paragraphs:

Personal Details (Paragraphs 1-3):

  • Your full name, date of birth, and citizenship status
  • Your spouse’s full name, date of birth, and citizenship status
  • Marriage details (date, location)

Separation Details (Paragraphs 4-8):

  • Exact date of separation
  • How separation was communicated
  • Why you continued living together
  • Your plans for future living arrangements

Changed Circumstances (Paragraphs 9-15):

  • Sleeping arrangements before and after separation
  • Changes to domestic duties (cooking, cleaning, laundry)
  • Financial arrangement changes
  • Social and family activity changes
  • Who was informed and when
  • Government departments notified

Children (if applicable) (Paragraphs 16-18):

  • Living arrangements for children during separation
  • Parenting schedule details
  • Future parenting plans

Court Hearing Requirements

If separation under one roof applies:

Joint Application with Children Under 18: At least one party must attend the hearing

Sole Application with Children Under 18: The applicant must attend the hearing

Applications Without Children or Children Over 18: Attendance may not be required if sufficient evidence is provided, though the Court may request attendance

Important: If you are still living at the same address when you apply for divorce, you must explain your plans for separate living arrangements. The Court may not grant divorce if you intend to continue living together indefinitely, as this may suggest the possibility of reconciliation.

Property Settlement While Separated Under One Roof

Property settlement can proceed while you continue living together, though this arrangement adds complexity to negotiations.

Time Limits for Property Settlement

Under Australian family law:

  • Married couples: Must apply for property settlement within 12 months of divorce being finalised
  • De facto couples: Must apply within 2 years of separation

Since separation under one roof still counts as separation, these time limits apply from your agreed separation date, not from when you physically move apart.

Challenges of Property Settlement While Living Together

Living together during property settlement creates unique challenges:

Valuation Issues:

  • Determining the value of shared household items
  • Assessing contributions made after separation but before moving apart
  • Valuing the family home while both parties reside there

Ongoing Contributions:

  • Mortgage payments made by one or both parties post-separation
  • Maintenance and improvements to the property
  • Household expenses and who bears them

Emotional Considerations:

  • Maintaining professional boundaries during negotiations
  • Avoiding discussions that could prejudice negotiations
  • Managing stress of living with someone during adversarial processes

Protecting Your Interests During Property Settlement

Financial Protection:

  • Document all financial contributions made post-separation
  • Keep detailed records of expenses paid
  • Maintain separate finances with clear paper trails
  • Consider a formal agreement about interim financial arrangements

Property Protection:

  • Document the condition of assets at separation date
  • Do not make significant changes to shared property without agreement
  • Keep receipts for any improvements or maintenance
  • Consider interim agreements about property use

Legal Protection:

  • Obtain independent legal advice early
  • Consider mediation to resolve disputes efficiently
  • Document all agreements in writing
  • Be cautious about verbal commitments

Child Support and Parenting Arrangements

Separation under one roof affects child support assessments and parenting arrangements in specific ways.

Child Support Agency Recognition

The Child Support Agency (Services Australia) recognises separation under one roof for child support purposes. You can:

  • Register for child support assessment while living together
  • Have your care percentage assessed based on actual arrangements
  • Receive or pay child support while sharing accommodation

Care Percentage Calculations

When separated under one roof, care percentages are calculated based on:

  • Who the children sleep with each night
  • Who is responsible for their daily care
  • Whether care is shared equally or primarily with one parent

Care Percentage Thresholds:

  • Below 14%: No reduction in child support liability
  • 14-34%: Regular care
  • 35-47%: Shared care
  • 48-52%: Equal shared care (substantial cost offset)
  • 53-65%: Primary care
  • 66-86%: Major care
  • Above 86%: Full care

Creating Parenting Plans While Living Together

Even while sharing accommodation, establishing clear parenting arrangements helps:

Areas to Address:

  1. Daily Routines
    • Who prepares meals for children
    • Who assists with homework
    • Who handles bedtime routines
    • Who manages school mornings
  2. Decision-Making
    • Major decisions (education, health, religion)
    • Day-to-day decisions
    • Emergency decisions
  3. Time Allocation
    • Which parent children spend time with on weekdays
    • Weekend arrangements
    • Holiday schedules
    • Special occasions (birthdays, holidays)
  4. Communication
    • How parents will communicate about children
    • Use of co-parenting apps
    • Rules about discussing parenting matters

Transition to Separate Households

Planning for eventual physical separation helps children adjust. Consider:

  • Gradual introduction of separate parent time
  • Maintaining consistency between households
  • Preparing children for the change age-appropriately
  • Agreeing on co-parenting principles before moving apart

Practical Tips for Living Separated Under One Roof

Successfully navigating separation while living together requires clear boundaries, practical systems, and emotional awareness.

Establishing Physical Boundaries

Sleeping Arrangements:

  • Designate separate bedrooms
  • Establish clear private spaces
  • Remove personal items from shared areas
  • Consider separate bathrooms if possible

Living Spaces:

  • Divide common areas by time or purpose
  • Create schedules for kitchen and laundry use
  • Designate private storage areas
  • Establish rules about entering each other’s spaces

Financial Management Systems

Household Expenses: Create a clear system for managing shared costs:

  1. Option 1: Proportional Split
    • Divide expenses based on income ratio
    • Use a spreadsheet or app to track contributions
    • Settle accounts weekly or monthly
  2. Option 2: Bill Assignment
    • Each person pays specific bills entirely
    • Aim for roughly equal total contributions
    • Adjust if circumstances change
  3. Option 3: Joint Account for Household Only
    • Contribute equal or proportional amounts monthly
    • Use only for agreed household expenses
    • Maintain separate personal accounts

Expense Categories to Address:

  • Rent or mortgage payments
  • Utilities (electricity, gas, water, internet)
  • Groceries (shared or separate)
  • Home maintenance and repairs
  • Insurance (home, contents)
  • Council rates
  • Children’s expenses (if applicable)

Communication Strategies

Daily Communication:

  • Keep conversations practical and focused
  • Avoid discussing relationship issues
  • Use written communication for important matters
  • Establish “business hours” for discussing logistics

Conflict Resolution:

  • Agree on a cooling-off process
  • Consider involving a neutral third party
  • Document agreements in writing
  • Seek mediation for ongoing disputes

Co-Parenting Communication:

  • Use co-parenting apps like OurFamilyWizard, Talking Parents, or Cozi
  • Keep child-related discussions separate from other matters
  • Focus on children’s needs, not personal grievances
  • Present a united front to children on important matters

Protecting Your Privacy

Digital Security:

  • Change passwords on all accounts
  • Remove your former partner’s access to shared accounts
  • Secure your email and social media
  • Use private browsing for sensitive searches

Physical Privacy:

  • Keep important documents in a secure location
  • Store legal correspondence privately
  • Consider a PO Box for sensitive mail
  • Secure your private space with locks if necessary

Professional Communications:

  • Take legal calls privately
  • Don’t leave legal documents visible
  • Consider using a different device for sensitive matters
  • Be cautious about shared calendars or devices

Self-Care and Support

Emotional Support:

  • Maintain connections with friends and family
  • Consider individual counselling
  • Join support groups for separated individuals
  • Practice self-care routines

Professional Support:

  • Engage a family lawyer early
  • Consider mediation for dispute resolution
  • Consult a financial planner
  • Seek tax advice about your changed circumstances

Domestic Violence Considerations

Separation under one roof takes on additional complexity when domestic or family violence is involved.

Safety Concerns

If you are experiencing domestic violence, your safety is the priority. Separation under one roof may not be safe or appropriate if:

  • There is a history of physical violence
  • You feel unsafe in your home
  • Violence or threats have occurred since separation
  • Coercive control is present
  • Children are at risk

Resources for Domestic Violence Support

National Services:

  • 1800RESPECT: 1800 737 732 (24/7 counselling and support)
  • Lifeline: 13 11 14 (24/7 crisis support)
  • MensLine Australia: 1300 78 99 78

State-Based Services:

  • Contact your state’s domestic violence helpline
  • Access legal aid services for family violence matters
  • Reach out to local refuges and shelters

SS293 Form and Domestic Violence

If completing the SS293 form would put you at risk:

  • You can request that your former partner not be required to complete their section
  • Centrelink has processes for family violence situations
  • Contact Services Australia to discuss your circumstances
  • Seek support from a social worker or family violence service

Intervention Orders

If necessary, you can apply for an intervention order (also called restraining order or apprehended violence order depending on jurisdiction) even while living together. Courts can make orders that:

  • Prevent specific behaviours
  • Require your former partner to leave the home
  • Establish conditions for continued cohabitation

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I get divorced while still living with my spouse?

Yes, Australian law recognises separation under one roof. You can apply for divorce after 12 months of separation even if you continue living together. However, you must provide additional evidence in the form of affidavits to prove your marriage has genuinely ended despite sharing accommodation.

How do I prove to Centrelink that I am separated but living together?

Complete the SS293 Relationship Details – Separated Under One Roof form. Both you and your former partner must complete the form (unless safety concerns apply). Provide supporting evidence such as separate bank statements, and be prepared for Centrelink to request additional information or interviews.

Will I receive higher Centrelink payments if I’m assessed as separated?

Generally, yes. Single rates for most Centrelink payments are higher than partnered rates. For example, Parenting Payment Single provides significantly higher payments than Parenting Payment Partnered. Your exact entitlements depend on your individual circumstances.

Do I need to attend court for a divorce if I was separated under one roof?

It depends on your circumstances. If you have children under 18, attendance is usually required. For couples without minor children who provide sufficient affidavit evidence, attendance may not be necessary. The Court can adjourn your matter and request attendance if more information is needed.

How long can I remain separated under one roof?

There is no legal limit on how long you can be separated while living together. However, if you intend to remain living together indefinitely, courts may question whether genuine separation has occurred, particularly for divorce purposes.

Can I start a new relationship while separated under one roof?

Yes, beginning a new relationship can actually support your claim of separation. However, this should be handled sensitively, particularly if children are involved. Consider how a new relationship might affect your living arrangements and your former partner’s wellbeing.

What if my former partner refuses to complete the SS293 form?

If your former partner refuses, explain this to Centrelink. They may accept your form alone with additional evidence, or they may conduct an interview to assess your circumstances. In domestic violence situations, your former partner may not need to complete the form at all.

Can I claim child support while separated under one roof?

Yes, the Child Support Agency recognises separation under one roof. Your child support assessment will be based on both parents’ incomes and the care percentage each parent provides, regardless of your living arrangements.

What happens to our property while we’re separated under one roof?

Your property rights remain protected regardless of living arrangements. However, it’s advisable to document your financial contributions during the separation period, maintain separate finances where possible, and seek legal advice about protecting your property settlement entitlements.

Should I tell my children we’re separated if we still live together?

This depends on your children’s ages and maturity. Generally, honesty is recommended, but the timing and approach should be age-appropriate. Present a united message if possible, reassure children that both parents love them, and consider professional support from a child psychologist if needed.

Why Choose Mediation for Separation Under One Roof?

Living separated under one roof creates unique tensions that benefit from professional dispute resolution. Mediations Australia provides specialised support for couples navigating this challenging situation.

Benefits of Mediation

Cost Savings: Family law disputes that proceed to litigation can cost $100,000 or more. Mediation typically resolves matters at a fraction of this cost, often saving couples up to $150,000 in legal fees.

Time Efficiency: Court proceedings can take years. Mediation sessions can resolve disputes in days or weeks, allowing you to move forward with your life sooner.

Better Outcomes: Research shows that mediated agreements have higher compliance rates than court-imposed orders. When you help create the solution, you’re more invested in making it work.

Reduced Conflict: Mediation focuses on problem-solving rather than adversarial positions. This is particularly important when you continue living together, as reduced conflict makes daily life more manageable.

Privacy: Court proceedings create public records. Mediation is confidential, protecting your family’s privacy during a difficult time.

Our Approach at Mediations Australia

Our team combines nationally accredited mediators with experienced family lawyers, providing comprehensive support throughout your separation journey.

What We Help With:

  1. Establishing Clear Boundaries
    • Living arrangement agreements
    • Household expense divisions
    • Privacy and space arrangements
  2. Creating Workable Household Arrangements
    • Schedules for shared spaces
    • Financial management systems
    • Practical cohabitation agreements
  3. Developing Communication Strategies
    • Conflict resolution frameworks
    • Co-parenting communication plans
    • Rules for difficult conversations
  4. Navigating Parenting Responsibilities
    • Parenting plans and schedules
    • Decision-making frameworks
    • Transition planning for eventual separate living
  5. Managing Financial Arrangements
    • Property settlement negotiations
    • Interim financial agreements
    • Child support arrangements

Our National Coverage

We provide services across Australia, including:

We also offer online mediation services for those unable to attend in person.

Conclusion: Moving Forward with Confidence

Next Steps:

If you’re separated under one roof, consider:

  1. Establishing clear boundaries and documenting your separation
  2. Notifying relevant government agencies of your relationship status change
  3. Seeking legal advice about property settlement and parenting arrangements
  4. Engaging a mediator to resolve disputes and create workable agreements
  5. Planning for eventual transition to separate households

Take the First Step Toward Resolution

Don’t face separation under one roof alone. Contact Mediations Australia for a confidential consultation with our family law experts and mediation specialists. We’ll help you understand your options and develop a practical plan that works.

Book Your Free Consultation Today

Our experienced mediators and family lawyers can help you:

  • Understand your legal rights and obligations
  • Create workable living arrangements
  • Navigate Centrelink and child support requirements
  • Develop effective co-parenting strategies
  • Resolve property settlement disputes efficiently

Book Now

How Much Does a Family Lawyer Cost in Australia

By Family Law, Mediation
Free Tool

Family Law Cost Estimator

Get an instant estimate comparing mediation vs. litigation costs based on your unique situation.

Your Situation

Mediation Path
$5,800
Range: $4,800 – $10,600
Typical timeframe: 1–3 days
You control the outcome
Litigation Path
$45,000
Range: $30,000 – $80,000+
Typical timeframe: 1–3 years
Judge decides for you
Potential Savings with Mediation
$39,200
That's approximately 87% less than litigation

Cost Breakdown

Service Component Mediation Litigation

Disclaimer: These estimates are indicative only, based on 2025 market rates. Actual costs vary based on individual circumstances, lawyer selection, and case developments. Consult a qualified family lawyer or mediator for personalised advice.

How Much Does a Family Lawyer Cost in Australia? A Complete 2026 Guide

Key Takeaways

  • Family lawyers in Australia charge between $300 and $750 per hour (plus GST), depending on experience, location, and case complexity.
  • The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia reports the average cost of a family law matter proceeding to a final hearing is approximately $30,000 per party — with complex cases exceeding $100,000.
  • Family Dispute Resolution (FDR) is mandatory for parenting matters before filing court applications, with government-funded services available free or at minimal cost.
  • Private mediation typically costs between $2,500 and $5,000 — a fraction of litigation costs — and can resolve disputes in days rather than years.
  • The smartest approach: Get initial legal advice from a family lawyer to understand your rights, then pursue mediation to resolve your dispute faster, cheaper, and with less emotional stress.

Introduction: Why Understanding Family Law Costs Matters

Navigating separation, divorce, or parenting disputes is one of life’s most challenging experiences. Beyond the emotional toll, many Australians find themselves overwhelmed by the financial burden of family law proceedings. The question “How much does a family lawyer cost?” is often the first one asked — and for good reason.

According to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, the average cost for a family law matter that proceeds to a final hearing is approximately $30,000 per party. Complex cases involving high-value assets, business interests, trusts, or contested parenting arrangements can escalate well beyond $100,000 — sometimes reaching $200,000 to $300,000 in protracted litigation.

But here’s what many Australians don’t realise: most family law disputes don’t need to reach a courtroom. With the right approach — combining initial legal advice with mediation — you can resolve your matter faster, protect your financial future, and preserve important relationships, particularly when children are involved.

This comprehensive guide will help you understand the true costs of family law services in Australia, explore all your options, and discover why mediation should be your first choice for dispute resolution.

How Much Does a Family Lawyer Cost in Australia?

Average Hourly Rates by Experience Level

Family lawyer fees in Australia vary significantly based on the lawyer’s experience, specialisation, and geographic location. Here’s a detailed breakdown of current market rates as of 2025:

Experience Level Years of Practice Hourly Rate (+ GST)
Junior Solicitor 1–4 years $300 – $500
Mid-Tier Associate 4–10 years $450 – $650
Senior Lawyer/Partner 10+ years $550 – $750+
Accredited Specialist Varies $600 – $800+
Paralegal/Support Staff N/A $80 – $180

Note: These rates are indicative only and reflect 2025 market rates. Actual costs may vary based on individual law firm pricing structures and specific case requirements.

Family Lawyer Costs by Location

Geographic location significantly impacts family lawyer fees. Lawyers in major metropolitan centres typically charge more than those in regional areas due to higher operating costs and market demand.

State/Territory Average Consultation Fee
New South Wales (Sydney CBD) $390 – $580+
Victoria (Melbourne CBD) $365 – $520+
Queensland (Brisbane/Gold Coast) $390 – $540
Western Australia $380 – $520
South Australia $340 – $520
Regional/Rural Areas 20–30% lower than metro

Common Family Law Service Costs

Understanding the typical cost range for specific family law services helps you budget appropriately and compare quotes from different providers:

Service Type Estimated Cost Range
Initial Consultation (1 hour) $300 – $600 (some offer 15 -30 min free)
Divorce Application (lawyer assisted) $1,500 – $3,500
Consent Orders (property or parenting) $3,000 – $7,000
Binding Financial Agreement (BFA) $4,500 – $10,000+
Mediation Support (lawyer attended) $2,500 – $5,000
Parenting Matter (simple, negotiated) $5,000 – $15,000
Parenting Matter (contested, court) $15,000 – $100,000+
Property Settlement (negotiated) $10,000 – $30,000
Property Settlement (litigated to trial) $50,000 – $200,000+
Full litigation to final hearing $60,000 – $300,000+

12 Key Factors That Determine Your Family Lawyer Costs

Understanding what drives legal costs empowers you to make informed decisions about your matter. Here are the primary factors that influence the total expense of your family law case:

  1. Case Complexity: Simple, uncontested matters cost significantly less than complex disputes involving multiple assets, business interests, trusts, superannuation splitting, or allegations of family violence.
  2. Level of Conflict: High-conflict matters where parties cannot agree on basic issues consume more legal time through extended negotiations, correspondence, and court appearances.
  3. Lawyer Experience: Senior lawyers and accredited specialists charge premium rates but may resolve matters more efficiently, potentially saving money overall.
  4. Geographic Location: CBD law firms typically charge 20–40% more than suburban or regional practices due to higher overheads.
  5. Court Involvement: Matters resolved through mediation cost a fraction of those requiring court intervention. Each court appearance adds thousands to your bill.
  6. Duration of Matter: The family law court system currently experiences significant delays, with some matters taking 2–3 years to reach final hearing. Longer matters mean higher costs.
  7. Expert Reports: Family reports, property valuations, business assessments, and psychological evaluations can add $5,000–$15,000 or more to your costs.
  8. Barrister Fees: Complex matters may require counsel, with barristers charging $1,100–$6,000+ per day for court appearances.
  9. Disclosure Obligations: Financial disclosure is mandatory under the Family Law Act 1975. Extensive documentation increases preparation time.
  10. Interim Applications: Urgent applications for interim orders (parenting arrangements, spousal maintenance, property injunctions) add court filing fees and legal costs.
  11. Billing Structure: Hourly billing can escalate unpredictably, while fixed-fee arrangements provide certainty for defined services.
  12. Client Cooperation: Being organised, providing documents promptly, and following advice reduces billable hours.

Federal Circuit and Family Court Filing Fees (2025)

In addition to legal representation costs, court proceedings attract filing fees set by the Family Law (Fees) Regulations 2022. These fees increased from 1 July 2025:

Application Type Filing Fee (from 1 July 2025)
Application for Divorce $1,125
Application for Divorce (reduced fee) $375
Application for Consent Orders $205
Initiating Application (Parenting OR Financial – Final) $435
Initiating Application (Parenting AND Financial) $710
Initiating Application + Interim Orders $585 – $860
Response to Initiating Application $435
Conciliation Conference $490
Daily Hearing Fee (Division 2 – after first day) $695/day
Daily Hearing Fee (Division 1 – after first day) $945/day

Fee Exemptions: You may be exempt from court fees (except divorce applications) if you hold a government concession card, receive youth allowance or Austudy, have been granted Legal Aid, or can demonstrate financial hardship. Divorce applications may qualify for a reduced fee of $375.

Why You Should Get Initial Legal Advice From a Family Lawyer

While this guide emphasises mediation as the preferred resolution pathway, obtaining initial legal advice from a qualified family lawyer is a crucial first step. Here’s why:

Understanding Your Legal Rights and Entitlements

Family law in Australia is complex and constantly evolving. The Family Law Amendment Act 2024, which commenced in June 2025, introduced significant changes to property settlement frameworks and dispute resolution requirements. A family lawyer can explain how these changes affect your situation and ensure you understand your rights under current legislation.

Avoiding Costly Mistakes

Without proper legal advice, you risk agreeing to arrangements that disadvantage you. Whether it’s accepting an unfair property division, agreeing to inappropriate parenting arrangements, or signing documents without understanding their implications, early legal advice can prevent expensive mistakes that may be difficult or impossible to reverse.

Preparing for Effective Mediation

Mediation is most effective when both parties understand the legal framework within which they’re negotiating. A lawyer can help you understand realistic outcomes, identify your priorities, prepare necessary documentation, and approach mediation with confidence. This preparation increases the likelihood of reaching a fair and lasting agreement.

Meeting Disclosure Obligations

The Family Law Act 1975 imposes strict financial disclosure obligations on both parties. The Family Law Amendment Act 2024 has strengthened these requirements, with potential cost consequences for non-compliance. A lawyer ensures you understand and meet these obligations from the outset.

Identifying When Court May Be Necessary

While mediation is suitable for most disputes, some situations require court intervention. Cases involving family violence, urgent child safety concerns, or parties who refuse to engage in good faith may need judicial determination. A lawyer can assess whether mediation is appropriate for your circumstances.

The Smart Approach: Invest in one or two consultations with a family lawyer to understand your rights and options. Then, armed with this knowledge, pursue mediation as your primary dispute resolution pathway. This approach typically costs $500–$1,500 for initial advice, compared to $30,000+ for full litigation.

Why Mediation Should Be Your First Choice

The Australian family law system strongly encourages mediation as the primary method for resolving disputes. For parenting matters, Family Dispute Resolution (FDR) is mandatory before filing court applications (unless an exemption applies). But beyond legal requirements, mediation offers compelling practical advantages:

The True Cost Comparison: Mediation vs. Litigation

Factor Mediation Litigation
Typical Cost $2,500 – $5,000 $60,000 – $300,000+
Timeframe Days to weeks 2.5 – 3.5+ years
Control You decide outcomes Judge decides
Confidentiality Private, confidential Public record
Relationship Impact Preserves relationships Often damages
Emotional Stress Lower Significantly higher
Flexibility Creative solutions Limited to legal remedies
Compliance Rate Higher (agreed) Lower (imposed)

Key Benefits of Choosing Mediation

1. Dramatically Lower Costs

Private mediation typically costs between $2,500 and $3,000 per party — around 95% less than the average $60,000 litigation cost. Government-funded Family Dispute Resolution services through Family Relationship Centres may be free or charge modest fees based on income (e.g., $70–$225 per session through Relationships Australia).

2. Faster Resolution

While litigation can take 2–3 years or longer to reach a final hearing, mediation can resolve disputes in a single day or over several sessions spanning weeks. This means you can move forward with your life much sooner.

3. You Control the Outcome

In mediation, you and the other party make the decisions together, guided by a neutral mediator. This contrasts with litigation, where a judge who doesn’t know your family makes binding determinations based on limited courtroom evidence.

4. Better for Children

Research consistently shows that parental conflict during and after separation is more damaging to children than the separation itself. Mediation reduces conflict, models cooperative problem-solving, and helps parents establish workable co-parenting arrangements focused on their children’s best interests.

5. Preserves Relationships

If you share children, you’ll need to co-parent for years or decades to come. Litigation’s adversarial nature often destroys any remaining goodwill between parties. Mediation’s collaborative approach helps preserve a functional co-parenting relationship.

6. Complete Confidentiality

Unlike court proceedings, which are generally public record, mediation is confidential. What you discuss cannot be used as evidence in court if mediation is unsuccessful. This encourages open, honest communication without fear of legal repercussions.

7. Creative, Tailored Solutions

Courts are limited to legal remedies. Mediation allows creative solutions tailored to your family’s unique circumstances — from flexible parenting schedules to innovative property division arrangements that courts might not order.

8. Higher Compliance Rates

Agreements reached through mediation have higher compliance rates than court-imposed orders. When people participate in creating solutions, they’re more committed to following through.

Understanding Mediation Costs in Australia

Government-Funded Family Dispute Resolution (FDR)

The Australian Government subsidises family dispute resolution services through Family Relationship Centres and community organisations. These services are designed to be accessible and affordable:

  • Family Relationship Centres: Often free for the first hour, then sliding scale fees based on income
  • Relationships Australia: $70–$150 per person for a 2-hour session (concession or income under $50k) or $150–$225 for higher income earners
  • Legal Aid FDR: Free for those who meet eligibility criteria
  • Court-Ordered FDR: Free when ordered by the Federal Circuit and Family Court

Private Mediation Services

Private mediation offers faster scheduling and more flexible arrangements, typically costing:

  • Parenting mediation: $2,500 – $4,000
  • Property/financial mediation: $3,000 – $5,000
  • Combined parenting and property: $4,000 – $6,000
  • Lawyer-assisted mediation: Additional legal fees apply

Note: Government-funded services often have waiting lists of several weeks to months. If your matter is urgent or you prefer faster resolution, private mediation may be worth the additional investment.

When Mediation May Not Be Appropriate

While mediation is suitable for most family law disputes, certain circumstances may make it inappropriate or exempt you from the mandatory FDR requirement:

  • Family Violence: Where there has been family violence or there is a risk of violence to a party or child
  • Urgent Child Safety: When a child is at immediate risk of abuse or harm
  • Significant Power Imbalance: Where one party cannot negotiate freely due to intimidation or control
  • Mental Health Concerns: Serious mental health issues affecting capacity to participate
  • Drug or Alcohol Abuse: Substance abuse affecting a party’s ability to engage meaningfully
  • Urgent Court Orders Required: Where immediate legal intervention is necessary
  • Party Refuses to Participate: The other party will not engage in good faith

An accredited FDR practitioner will assess your circumstances and determine whether mediation is appropriate. If not, they can issue a Section 60I certificate allowing you to proceed to court.

Important: If you are experiencing family violence, please contact 1800RESPECT (1800 737 732) for support. You should not attend mediation if you do not feel safe doing so.

15 Essential Questions to Ask Before Engaging a Family Lawyer

When seeking initial legal advice, these questions will help you understand costs, compare providers, and make an informed decision:

  1. Do you specialise exclusively in family law, or is this one of many practice areas?
  2. What is your hourly rate, and what are the rates for other staff who may work on my matter?
  3. Do you offer a free initial consultation, or what is your consultation fee?
  4. What is your billing method — hourly, fixed fee, or a combination?
  5. What retainer amount do you require, and how does the trust account work?
  6. Can you provide an estimate of total costs for my type of matter?
  7. Do you charge for phone calls, emails, and incidental communications?
  8. What additional disbursements might I expect (court fees, expert reports, barrister fees)?
  9. Will you personally handle my matter, or will it be delegated to other staff?
  10. Do you support mediation as a first option, and can you assist with this process?
  11. How often will you provide billing updates, and can I receive itemised invoices?
  12. What is your approach to settling matters without going to court?
  13. How do you communicate — email, phone, portal — and what are your response times?
  14. Are you an accredited family law specialist, and how many years have you practised in this area?
  15. What payment options do you offer (payment plans, legal funding arrangements)?

12 Practical Strategies to Minimise Your Family Law Costs

  1. Choose Mediation First: Start with mediation to resolve disputes before engaging lawyers for litigation. Even if you need legal advice first, pursuing mediation can save tens of thousands of dollars.
  2. Be Organised: Gather and organise all relevant documents before meeting your lawyer. This reduces time spent on administration at billable rates.
  3. Respond Promptly: Answer your lawyer’s requests for information quickly. Delays extend matters and increase costs.
  4. Communicate Efficiently: Save questions for scheduled calls rather than multiple emails. Prepare agendas for meetings.
  5. Focus on Outcomes, Not Emotions: Lawyers charge the same rate whether you’re discussing strategy or venting frustrations. Save emotional processing for counsellors (who charge less).
  6. Consider Unbundled Services: Some lawyers offer ‘unbundled’ services where you pay only for specific tasks (document review, advice sessions) rather than full representation.
  7. Use Free Resources: Access Family Relationships Online, Legal Aid websites, and court self-help resources for general information before consulting lawyers.
  8. Request Regular Cost Updates: Ask for monthly or fortnightly billing updates so you can monitor expenditure.
  9. Be Realistic: Unrealistic expectations lead to prolonged disputes. Listen to professional advice about likely outcomes.
  10. Avoid Unnecessary Court Applications: Each interim application adds thousands in legal fees and court costs.
  11. Check Fee Exemption Eligibility: If you hold a concession card or face financial hardship, you may qualify for reduced or waived court fees.
  12. Consider Legal Aid: If you meet income and asset tests, Legal Aid may provide free or subsidised representation.

Who Pays Legal Costs in Family Law Matters?

In Australia, the general rule is that each party pays their own legal costs in family law proceedings. This is known as the ‘no costs’ rule and reflects the family law system’s aim to encourage resolution rather than punish parties for bringing matters to court.

However, the court has discretion to order one party to pay all or part of the other party’s costs in certain circumstances:

  • Bad Faith Conduct: Where a party has conducted proceedings in a manner that is unreasonable, frivolous, or vexatious
  • Non-Compliance: Failure to comply with court orders, procedural rules, or disclosure obligations
  • Unreasonable Refusal to Negotiate: Declining reasonable settlement offers that are ultimately achieved or bettered at trial
  • False Allegations: Making allegations known to be false
  • Unnecessarily Prolonging Proceedings: Causing unnecessary delay or expense

The Family Law Amendment Act 2024 has introduced stronger measures regarding costs consequences, particularly for failure to comply with disclosure obligations and for conduct that unnecessarily prolongs proceedings.

2025 Family Law Changes You Need to Know

The Family Law Amendment Act 2024, which commenced on 10 June 2025, introduced significant changes affecting costs and dispute resolution:

Strengthened Disclosure Obligations

Lawyers and FDR practitioners must now inform parties about their duty of disclosure and the potential costs consequences of non-compliance. Courts can consider disclosure failures when determining property settlements.

Recognition of Economic Abuse

The amendments explicitly recognise economic or financial abuse (including dowry abuse) as family violence. The economic effect of family violence is now a relevant consideration in property settlements.

Simplified Divorce Process

The requirement for couples married less than two years to obtain a reconciliation certificate has been removed. All divorce applicants now follow the same process.

Mandatory FDR Certificate

The legislation clarifies that courts must refuse to accept parenting applications without a valid Section 60I certificate (or qualifying exemption), reinforcing the importance of attempting mediation first.

Enhanced Emphasis on Non-Adversarial Resolution

Courts now place even greater emphasis on mediation and alternative dispute resolution before proceeding to trial. This aligns with the policy objective of reducing conflict and encouraging collaborative solutions.

Take the Smarter Path to Resolution

The statistics are clear: litigation is expensive, time-consuming, emotionally exhausting, and often damages the very relationships you need to maintain, especially when children are involved. With average litigation costs of $30,000+ per party and timeframes stretching to 2–3 years, there has never been a better time to explore alternatives.

Our recommended approach:

  • Step 1: Consult a family lawyer for initial advice to understand your rights and entitlements ($300–$600 for one consultation, or free where offered)
  • Step 2: Engage a qualified mediator or Family Dispute Resolution practitioner to negotiate your settlement ($2,500–$5,000)
  • Step 3: Have your lawyer review and formalise any agreement through Consent Orders or a Binding Financial Agreement ($2,000–$5,000)

Total estimated cost: $5,000–$11,000 — compared to $30,000–$300,000+ for litigation.

Total estimated time: Weeks to months — compared to 1–3+ years for court proceedings.

Why Choose Mediations Australia?

At Mediations Australia, we believe that families deserve better than the stress, cost, and conflict of traditional litigation. Our team of experienced family law mediators and dispute resolution practitioners help separating couples across Australia resolve their disputes:

  • Faster: Resolve your matter in days or weeks, not years
  • Better: Achieve tailored outcomes that work for your family
  • Cheaper: Save tens of thousands compared to court proceedings

Our accredited Family Dispute Resolution practitioners can help with parenting arrangements, property settlements, child support disputes, and all aspects of family law resolution. We offer services in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide, and throughout regional Australia via video conferencing.

Ready to resolve your dispute the smarter way? Contact Mediations Australia today for a free, no-obligation consultation. Call us or visit www.mediationsaustralia.com.au to book your appointment.


Disclaimer: This article is for general information purposes only and is not a substitute for professional legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer or mediator for personalised guidance on your specific circumstances. The information in this article is current as of December 2025 and may be subject to change following legislative amendments or court decisions.

References and Further Resources

separation

Five Things to Do Before Uttering, ‘I Want a Divorce’

By Divorce, Family Law, Mediation

Are You Financially Ready for Separation?

A quick self-assessment based on expert recommendations for protecting your financial future

2 Minutes

Quick assessment

10 Questions

Covering 5 key areas

Personalised

Tailored recommendations

Your answers are completely private and not stored anywhere.

Question 1 of 10 10%

Going Your Separate Ways Doesn’t Need to Be as Costly If You Follow These Financial Tips

Making the decision to end a marriage is never easy. It’s an emotional, often overwhelming process that touches every aspect of your life—your home, your children, your friendships, and crucially, your finances. Yet amidst the heartache and uncertainty, there are practical steps you can take to protect yourself and lay the groundwork for a smoother transition.

The reality is that divorce in Australia can be expensive, time-consuming, and emotionally draining—particularly when disputes escalate to litigation. According to research, the average cost of a contested divorce through the court system can run into tens of thousands of dollars, with some cases exceeding $100,000 or more. The process can drag on for years, leaving both parties financially and emotionally depleted.

However, it doesn’t have to be this way. By preparing your finances in advance and embracing collaborative approaches like mediation, you can significantly reduce the cost, stress, and duration of your separation. Family Law Mediation offers couples the opportunity to resolve disputes faster, more affordably, and with far less conflict than traditional litigation—preserving relationships and protecting what matters most: your family’s wellbeing and your financial future.

Consider the experience of many Australians who find themselves blindsided by separation. Even financially savvy individuals—including those who work in the finance industry—can be caught off guard when a relationship ends abruptly. Joint bank accounts can be emptied, access to the family home can be lost, and suddenly you’re left scrambling to support yourself and your children with limited resources.

Those who fare best in these situations are typically the ones who planned ahead. Having even a modest amount of money set aside in a personal account—accumulated gradually over time—can make the difference between crisis and stability. The goal isn’t to deceive your partner or gain an unfair advantage; it’s simply to create a safety net that ensures you can meet your basic needs during the transition.

Financial advisers and family lawyers report that they are increasingly seeing more people, particularly women, seeking advice before they separate. While it’s not always possible to prepare in advance, it is definitely financially savvy to get your financial affairs in order well before you utter the words “I want a divorce.” The goal is protection, not predation—it’s about creating a safety net.

Here are five essential steps to take before initiating a divorce conversation.

1. Map Your Financial World

Knowledge is power, and nowhere is this more true than in divorce proceedings. Understanding the complete financial landscape of your relationship is the foundation upon which all other preparations are built.

There’s significant merit in understanding your household finances—everything from bank accounts to asset ownership—well before the relationship hits the rocks. But if it already has, it’s imperative to get up to speed quickly.

Start by examining any financial documents that come through digitally or via post. This includes bank statements, superannuation statements, tax returns, and any other financial records you can access. Make your own copies, photograph them, or take detailed notes so you understand the complete financial picture of the relationship and who’s managing what.

The first step before saying you want a divorce is to map your joint financial position and net worth. Identify all assets—superannuation, cash, property, investments—and all debts.

This comprehensive financial mapping should include bank accounts (both joint and individual), superannuation balances for both parties, investment portfolios, real estate holdings, vehicles, business interests, valuable personal property such as jewellery or artwork, and any debts including mortgages, credit cards, personal loans, and tax liabilities.

Under the Family Law Act 1975, both parties in a divorce are required to provide full and frank disclosure of their financial circumstances. Having this information readily available not only protects your interests but also streamlines the resolution process—whether through mediation or other means. Couples who enter mediation with a clear understanding of their financial position are far more likely to reach a fair and efficient settlement, avoiding the costly discovery processes that can characterise contested court proceedings.

Remember, in Australian family law, the asset pool typically includes all assets acquired before, during, and after the relationship by either party. Superannuation is also considered property and can be split between parties. Understanding these principles early helps you approach negotiations with realistic expectations.

2. Set Up a Separate Account

Don’t count on having access to your joint accounts. In worst-case scenarios, joint accounts can be emptied without warning, leaving you stranded at a critical moment.

Ahead of any split, it makes sense to have a bank account in your own name if you don’t have access to one already. Setting up your own bank account with at least one month’s worth of expenses covered is a good starting point.

Aim for enough cash to cover one to two months of living costs, depending on your earnings and whether your existing income can sustain yourself when living alone. This buffer provides crucial breathing room during the initial upheaval of separation.

In a worst-case scenario, disgruntled partners can empty joint bank accounts entirely. Having your own account not only provides you with a sense of financial empowerment but creates some protection if things turn ugly.

It’s important to understand that any funds held in that account will form part of the asset pool in divorce negotiations—you’re not hiding money, and attempting to do so would breach your disclosure obligations. Rather, these funds are essential to making sure you can sustain yourself following a split and can potentially help fund professional advice, including mediation services.

Having access to your own funds also means you can engage a mediator early in the process, which is often far more cost-effective than immediately instructing lawyers for adversarial proceedings. A professional mediator can help both parties work through financial and parenting arrangements in a collaborative environment, typically at a fraction of the cost of litigation.

3. Do a Credit Check

It may seem mundane compared to the emotional weight of divorce, but getting a credit check before you separate can be critical to your financial future.

Your credit score affects your ability to secure rental accommodation, obtain finance for a car or home, pay for subscriptions, and even sign up for certain services. A poor credit score can cripple your ability to rebuild your life after separation.

In Australia, you can obtain a free credit report from agencies such as Equifax, Experian, or illion. These reports detail your credit history, including any defaults, enquiries, or negative listings.

Checking your credit early gives you time to identify any issues and begin repairing your score if necessary. It also helps you avoid devastating surprises that might not even be your fault. For instance, if you’ve been a guarantor on your partner’s debts or if joint accounts have fallen into arrears without your knowledge, these matters will appear on your credit file.

If you discover errors or unexpected entries, you can dispute them with the credit reporting agency or take steps to address outstanding debts. This proactive approach ensures you’re in the strongest possible position to move forward independently.

Understanding your credit situation is also valuable information to bring into mediation, where discussions about debt allocation and future financial responsibilities will be central to reaching a fair agreement.

4. Seek Advice Early

One of the most empowering things you can do before initiating a divorce is to engage professional help. This doesn’t necessarily mean preparing for battle—in fact, the opposite is true. Early advice helps you understand your options, including the significant benefits of resolving matters through mediation rather than litigation.

Getting legal advice early and starting to visualise your post-separation future is strongly recommended. This means taking the time to consider and define your personal goals. Ask yourself: what do I want my future to look like once I’m single again?

For some, it’s about staying in the family home; for others, it’s about financial security, flexibility, or simply peace of mind. The clearer you can be on the future that you want to live and what that might mean for you financially, the more ready you will be to make decisions when separating.

It’s also worth thinking about what your potential ex-partner will want and any potential conflicts that could arise. This foresight can often help people navigate the separation process more easily.

When children are involved, things naturally become trickier. However, if you can find common ground and get on the same page early on, it significantly eases the navigation of the entire separation process.

This is precisely where mediation shines. Unlike adversarial court proceedings, mediation provides a structured, confidential environment where both parties can work together—with the guidance of a neutral, accredited mediator—to reach mutually acceptable outcomes. Mediation preserves relationships, protects children from the fallout of parental conflict, and allows couples to craft creative solutions tailored to their unique circumstances.

Under the Family Law Act 1975, separating couples with parenting disputes are generally required to attempt Family Dispute Resolution (a form of mediation) before filing an application in court, except in cases involving family violence or urgency. This legislative emphasis on mediation reflects its proven effectiveness in resolving family disputes.

Having a network of experts—including a mediator, a family lawyer for independent advice, a financial adviser, and perhaps a counsellor—and prioritising your own health are essential for the marathon ahead. The average time for a divorce can be anything from a few months to several years from break-up to asset settlement. Having the right support makes all the difference.

5. Do Your Budget

Finally, budget for your post-split self and any dependants. Understanding your financial needs as a single person or single parent is crucial to making informed decisions during separation negotiations.

It is important to know that you are going to be able to meet your regular expenses with your income once you have separated. This means calculating your essential living costs—housing, utilities, food, transport, healthcare, childcare, school fees, insurance, and debt repayments—and comparing them against your anticipated income. Be realistic and thorough; it’s better to overestimate expenses than to find yourself short.

It’s also wise to look at upskilling yourself if your income is likely to fall short. Ask yourself: is my current income enough? And if not, what kind of things can I do over the next year or two to increase that? Whether it’s going back to study, gaining new qualifications, or pursuing a better-paying job, forward planning can make a significant difference to your financial independence.

If you’ve been out of the workforce or working part-time while raising children, consider what steps you might need to take to re-enter employment or increase your earning capacity. This forward-thinking approach not only strengthens your financial position but also demonstrates to mediators and courts alike that you’re taking responsibility for your future.

A detailed budget is also invaluable in mediation. When both parties understand their genuine financial needs, negotiations become more grounded and productive. Rather than fighting over arbitrary figures, you can focus on practical solutions that meet everyone’s essential requirements.

The Path Forward: Choosing Mediation

Divorce is undoubtedly one of life’s most challenging experiences. But by taking these five steps—mapping your finances, establishing a separate account, checking your credit, seeking early advice, and preparing your budget—you place yourself in the strongest possible position to navigate what lies ahead.

More importantly, by embracing mediation as your preferred pathway to resolution, you can avoid the financial devastation, prolonged conflict, and emotional trauma that so often accompany contested court proceedings. Mediation empowers you and your former partner to take control of your own outcomes, reach agreements that work for your family, and move forward with dignity and respect.

At Mediations Australia, we specialise in helping separating couples resolve their disputes faster, better, and cheaper. Our accredited family dispute resolution practitioners provide a safe, confidential, and supportive environment where you can work through financial and parenting arrangements without the adversarial nature of litigation. We encourage you to reach out and explore how mediation can help you achieve a fair and lasting resolution.

Disclaimer: This article is for general information purposes only and is not a substitute for professional legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer or mediator for personalised guidance.