Thursday 28 March 2013

Responsibilities Between A Partner And Financial Agreement

By Ray Latimer


Prior to the right to create Binding Financial Agreements (BFAs) was extended to same-sex and de facto relationships, when such a relationship had broken down, both parties would have had to prepare themselves for some long-winded and monotonous 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 particularly entitles people in de facto relationships to agree upon what they contemplate to be a rational distribution of property and financial resources once the relationship has broken down. Efficiently, this now puts de facto agreements in the same category as is already loved by married couples. This means that same-sex relationships are apportioned with similar 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 Preparing A BFA In These Conditions? If a de facto, or same-sex relationship has broken down irretrievably, s.90UD of the 1975 Act sets out that the following practices will have to be put into practice in order for a court to recognize and apply a binding financial agreement. These are as follows. They would need to make certain that each party obtain professional and qualified legal services. This is vital and it should help to be sure that each party's unique situation is examined 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 on and sign when they know exactly what they are agreeing to and/or possibly compromising.

A certificate must be obtained from the applicable legal professional which will attest to the truth that this demand has been satisfied. It would then has to be added as an `annex' to the main written legal document which will make up the BFA. The BFA will need to identify the scope of any relevant spousal maintenance to be provided. It will has 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 scrutinize 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 like the BFA had been created in a fraudulent manner. It is also imperative that you 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 by the end of a Relationship. This type of post nuptial agreement should help to guarantee that any financial matters are dealt with far more smoothly than they may well be. Given, some time would be necessary on both sides to conceive the binding financial agreement, but once a settlement is agreed upon, the BFA will offer a far quicker resolution to the question of who gets what. Of course, to a large degree, at the end of any relationship and at a period when communication between each party may not be as manageable as it once was, a lot will depend on how fast an agreement can be settled. On the other hand, it would probably become more prudent and affordable for the parties to resolve the asset and financial implications in this way.

Whichever actions the members of a de facto relationship elect to take when things have separated, the reality is that Australian law now offers them with these options.




About the Author:



No comments:

Post a Comment