This article explores what a 70/30 divorce settlement means, when it applies and how property division is decided in Australia.
Dividing assets after separation is often one of the most challenging aspects of divorce. While many people assume a 50/50 split is standard, Australian family law recognises that a just and equitable outcome depends on many factors. There is no standard division of assets. For example, a 70/30 divorce settlement in Australia may be just and equitable, especially where one party has made significantly greater financial or non-financial contributions or there is a significant disparity in their respective current and future needs.
What is a 70/30 Divorce Settlement?
A 70/30 divorce settlement refers to the division of the asset pool where one party receives 70% of the combined assets, and the other receives 30%. This split is not a legal rule but rather a reflection of the court’s discretion to ensure a fair and equitable distribution based on individual circumstances.
The property pool includes all assets and liabilities, such as the family home, investment properties, bank accounts, superannuation, business interests and debts. The Family Law Act 1975 guides the division, aiming for an outcome that reflects both financial contributions (like income and direct asset purchases) and non-financial contributions (such as homemaking and caregiving). The court also takes into consideration the current and future circumstances of the parties (eg income, health, and care of children).
How Does the Federal Circuit and Family Court Decide on Asset Division?
The Federal Circuit and Family Court’s role is to achieve a just and equitable outcome, meaning the division may not always be equal, but should be fair considering:
- Financial contributions: Income, property, investments, and business interests brought into or acquired during the relationship and post separation.
- Non-financial contributions: Caring for children, managing the household, and other indirect contributions.
- Current and Future circumstances: Age, health, earning capacity, and whether one party is the primary caregiver for children.
- Length of the relationship: How long you were together and the roles each party played.
- Financial circumstances: Income, assets and other financial resources available to both parties.
- Legal fees & potential financial obligations post-divorce: Ongoing financial support, child support and spousal maintenance may also be taken into account when the court determines settlement.
How Common is a 70/30 Split in Divorce Settlements?
While a 50/50 split might be the public perception, there is no guarantee that the asset pool will be divided equally. When there is a significant imbalance in contributions or future earning capacity, a 70/30 divorce settlement may be a fair and reasonable outcome.
For example, if one partner was the primary caregiver and sacrificed career advancement, or if one party contributed substantially more financially, courts may award a larger share to that party.
The Four-Step Process to a Property Settlement
1. Identify and value the asset pool
Collect all relevant financial documents such as bank statements, investment portfolios, property valuations, superannuation statements and business related documents.
2. Assess contributions and circumstances
Evaluate direct financial contributions, non-financial contributions, and the current and future circumstances of both parties, including caregiving responsibilities and earning capacity.
3. Negotiate a property settlement agreement
Attempt to reach a mutual agreement either privately or through mediation sessions. Informal agreements decided between both parties are possible, but are best made legally binding via consent orders or a binding financial agreement – especially if there is any doubt that agreements will be followed.
4. Initiate court proceedings if necessary
If negotiations fail, either party can apply to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia to determine a fair division based on evidence. The court considers all family law matters under the Family Law Act 1975 and issues orders accordingly in a way that they see as just and equitable. This can be helpful if agreements cannot be reached otherwise, but also removes the ability to have a say in the outcome.
When Might a 70/30 Divorce Settlement Be Considered Fair?
A 70/30 split may be just and equitable when there is a significant imbalance in contributions or future circumstances between the parties. Here are some examples where a 70/30 property division may be justified:
- Short relationship with no children and unequal financial contributions: For instance, a couple has been together for three years, and one party contributed 95% of the assets. Both parties are working, and both have the financial capacity to start fresh. In this case, awarding 70% of the property pool to the major contributor recognises their substantial financial input.
- One party has gambled away or mismanaged assets: If one partner has depleted joint assets through poor financial decisions or gambling, the court may consider a 70/30 split to protect the other party’s interests, especially if children’s welfare depends on maintaining financial stability.
- Primary caregiving responsibilities: When one party has been the primary caregiver to children and has sacrificed career progression or earning capacity, a larger share may be awarded to reflect these non-financial contributions and future circumstances.
- Significant disparity in earning capacity or health concerns: If one spouse has serious health issues limiting their future income or earning capacity, or one party is nearing retirement while the other is younger and earning more, assets divided in a 70/30 split may be considered just and equitable and ensure ongoing financial security for the vulnerable party.
In these scenarios, the court determines a just and equitable outcome that balances both parties’ contributions and circumstances.
When Might a 70/30 Divorce Settlement Be Less Fair or Contested?
A 70/30 split might be viewed as less fair or contested when the imbalance in contributions is not as clear or when both parties have contributed similarly and/or where both parties have similar future circumstances. Some examples include:
- Longer relationships with shared contributions: In marriages or de facto relationships of 10 years or more, especially with children involved, the Courts may order a more equal split such as 50/50 or 60/40, unless there is strong evidence of disproportionate contributions.
- Both parties have financial independence and earning capacity: When both spouses have contributed financially and non-financially in roughly equal measure and both are able to support themselves post-separation, a 70/30 split may not be justified.
Why Seek Legal Advice Early?
Asset division can be complex, and legal representation ensures you understand your rights and obligations. A family lawyer can help:
- Analyse your financial documents and asset pool
- Advise on fair settlement options and risks of litigation
- Negotiate binding financial agreements
- Represent you in court proceedings if necessary
- Help protect your financial stability and future support needs
Conclusion
A 70/30 divorce settlement in Australia recognises that not all relationships end with equal asset division. Courts carefully assess contributions, and current and future circumstances, to deliver a just and equitable outcome. Understanding the process, knowing your rights, and seeking professional guidance will help you achieve the best result.
If you’re facing a divorce and need assistance with property settlement, get in touch with the team at Stewart Family Law. Our Property Settlement Lawyers can guide you through the process, help protect your interests and secure a legally binding and fair resolution for your separation or divorce property settlement.
