Before the ability to make Binding Financial Agreements (BFAs) was extended to same-sex and de facto relationships, when such a relationship had split up, each party would have had to arrange themselves for some long-winded and laborious litigation through the Supreme Court. Thank goodness, this has now all been modified with the introduction of section 90UD of the Family Law Act 1975 which specifically allows people in de facto relationships to agree upon what they contemplate to be a considerable division of property and money once the relationship has separated. Efficiently, this now puts de facto agreements in the same category as is already appreciated by husbands and wives. It implies that same-sex relationships are apportioned with the exact same rights to heterosexual couples and this will be observed as a welcome move by many gay rights groups that have been concerned and campaigning throughout these issues.
How Would You Go About Building A BFA In These Conditions? If a de facto, or same-sex relationship has split up irretrievably, s.90UD of the 1975 Act sets out that the following operations would need to be implemented for a court to recognise and apply a binding financial agreement. These are the following: They will have to guarantee that both sides seek professional and qualified legal advice. This is imperative and it should help to ensure that each party’s unique situation is assessed and legally commented upon. If gross unfairness can be identified within the agreement as it stands, the legal advisor will point this out to the relevant partner and they will then only go ahead and sign once they know precisely what they are agreeing to and/or possibly compromising.
A certificate must be received from the applicable legal professional which will attest to the point that this need has been pleased. It would then need to be put in as an ‘annex’ to the main written legal document which will constitute the BFA. The BFA will have to specify the scope of any relevant spousal maintenance to be provided. It will need to be signed by both people and a copy will be retained by each. Provided all of the steps have been taken above, the court should not scrutinise the BFA to make sure that it is just and equitable. The court would only tend to set a BFA aside if there were fundamental flaws with the documents (e.g. the BFA had been created in a fraudulent manner). It is also essential to note that a person can only enter into a BFA if they are not already party to such an agreement with someone else.
Swifter Conclusion at the end of a Relationship: The sort of post nuptial agreement should help to make certain that any financial matters are dealt with far more smoothly than they may otherwise be. Given, some time would be essential on both sides to conceive the binding financial agreement, but once a settlement is decided, the BFA will provide a far quicker resolution to the question of who gets what. Naturally, to a large scope, at the end of any relationship and at a time when communication between both sides may not be as manageable as it once was, a lot will rely on how fast an agreement can be completed. Nonetheless, it would probably end up being more prudent and affordable for the parties to settle the asset and financial risks in this way.
Whatever actions the members of a de facto relationship elect to take when things have separated, the fact remains that Australian law now provides them with these alternatives. Gone are the days where there was only very limited avenues that could be went after in order to settle such challenges. Such de facto agreements now exist to understand a swifter decision to the division of property and financial resources.
Discover how a financial agreement can benefit you. Visit our website for more.
