Family violence and property settlement: what changed.

Until the 2024 reforms, family violence was technically separate from property settlement — relevant for parenting orders, not for who got the house. In practice, however, the Court had developed the Kennon doctrine to recognise that violence affects contributions. The 2024 amendments wrote this into statute.

The old position — Kennon adjustments

Kennon v Kennon (1997) FLC 92-757 established that violence by one party against the other could be considered in the property settlement where the violence had a “discernible impact” on the victim’s ability to contribute. The adjustment was usually 5–15% in the victim’s favour.

Kennon adjustments were narrow and required specific evidence linking the violence to a measurable effect on contributions — not just a finding that violence occurred. Many victims found the threshold difficult to meet.

The 2024 amendments — s79(4)(ca)

The Family Law Amendment Act 2023 (in force from 6 May 2024) added s79(4)(ca) which requires the court to consider:

In plain English: where family violence affected the victim’s capacity to contribute (financially, as a homemaker, or otherwise), that is now a mandatory consideration at step 2 of the s79 process — not an optional Kennon-style argument.

What this means in practice

• Evidence remains essential. Police records, AVO/IVO orders, medical records, counselling notes, contemporaneous diary entries. The court does not draw inferences without evidence.
• Linkage to contribution capacity matters. The amendment specifically references the victim’s “ability to contribute.” A finding of violence without evidence it affected contribution may not produce an adjustment.
• Future needs separately enhanced. Family violence often also affects future earning capacity (psychological impact, health, lost opportunities) — relevant under step 3 (s75(2) future-needs factors).
• Average adjustments have grown. Post-amendment matters have seen adjustments of 10–20% in clear cases, up from 5–15% under Kennon.

Apprehended Violence Orders / Intervention Orders

A protective order obtained during the relationship or at separation is significant evidence in any subsequent property matter. Each state has its own regime:

• NSW: Apprehended Violence Order (AVO) under the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007.
• VIC: Intervention Order under the Family Violence Protection Act 2008.
• QLD: Domestic Violence Order under the Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act 2012.
• WA, SA, TAS, NT, ACT: Equivalent state-based protective orders.

An order itself is not proof of the underlying behaviour for property purposes, but it strongly supports the contention that violence occurred.

Practical pathway

1. Safety first. Apply for a protective order if there is ongoing risk. The order does not prejudice your property or parenting position.
2. Gather evidence early. Police records, medical records, photographs, diary entries, communications. The older the evidence, the harder to obtain later.
3. Engage a family lawyer with violence-experienced practice. Not every family lawyer is comfortable running the s79(4)(ca) argument. Ask for examples of post-amendment matters they’ve run.
4. Decide on disclosure timing. Whether to disclose violence allegations in the property pleadings, in correspondence, or only at hearing is a strategic question. Get advice.

Resources

• 1800RESPECT: 24-hour national family violence counselling service. 1800 737 732.
• Men’s Referral Service: 1300 766 491 (for men who want to change violent behaviour).
• Lifeline: 13 11 14.
• Police: 000 (emergency) or 131 444 (non-urgent).