Financial Abuse More Clearly Recognised as Family Violence: What It Means for Property Settlements under the 2025 Reforms
The 2025 family law reforms have brought financial abuse into sharper focus when separating couples divide their property.
Financial control could already amount to family violence under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). From 10 June 2025, the law went further. It now expressly identifies economic or financial abuse as conduct that may constitute family violence, gives clearer examples of the conduct this can include and makes the effect of family violence an express part of the property settlement process.
What can financial abuse look like?
Financial abuse is not limited to withholding money.
• forcibly controlling a person’s money or assets, including superannuation;
• sabotaging their employment, income or prospects of employment or income;
• forcing them to take on financial or legal liabilities;
• forcibly, or without their knowledge, accumulating debt in their name;
• unreasonably withholding financial support needed for reasonable living expenses; and
• certain forms of dowry abuse.
These examples recognise that financial abuse can affect much more than access to a bank account. It can limit a person’s financial independence, earning capacity and ability to meet everyday expenses.
Not every disagreement about money amounts to family violence. The circumstances still matter, including whether the conduct coerced or controlled the other person or caused them to be fearful and what effect it had.
Why can this affect a property settlement?
The reforms also make the economic effect of family violence expressly relevant to how property is divided after separation.
Where relevant, the Court must take into account whether family violence affected a person’s ability to make financial, non-financial, homemaker or parenting contributions.
The Court must also take into account, where relevant, the effect of family violence on that person’s current and future circumstances.
The focus is therefore not only on what happened, but also on what financial effect it had.
A recent example: Pryor & Pryor
The way these reforms operate is now beginning to emerge in recent Court decisions.
In Pryor & Pryor (No 2) [2026] FedCFamC1F 77, Austin J considered a pattern of financial and other controlling behaviour by the husband.
One example was the husband blocking the wife’s use of a credit card when she had no other means of meeting essential household expenses, including groceries and appliance repairs.
Austin J accepted the wife’s evidence of the husband’s financial control and found that his financial and other forms of control, both during the marriage and after separation, had hampered her ability to contribute.
Pryor is an early example of the Court applying the post-2025 property framework where financial control formed part of the family violence found by the Court.
It does not mean that cancelling a credit card, closing an account or separating finances will automatically amount to financial abuse. The nature of the conduct, the surrounding circumstances and its effect remain important.
What does this mean for separating couples?
The reforms provide a clearer pathway for the financial consequences of family violence to be taken into account in a property settlement.
Where financial abuse has limited a person’s ability to work, access money or assets, meet expenses or make contributions to the family, those consequences may be relevant when the Court decides how property should be divided.
There is no automatic adjustment simply because financial abuse is established. Each case depends on its own facts and the evidence of its impact.
Records such as bank and credit card statements, communications about access to money, employment records and evidence of debts or financial support may therefore be important.
This article provides general information only and is not legal advice. It does not take into account your particular circumstances. For advice about your situation, please contact Nerida Legal.