Family Violence and Property Settlements: Economic Effect and Kennon Adjustments After the 2024 Reforms 

For business owners, directors, professionals and high-net-worth individuals separating in Victoria, family violence can now have an express statutory bearing on the division of property where it has affected the parties’ finances, contributions, or future circumstances. For family violence and property settlement in Australia, the central issue is not simply whether family violence occurred, but whether there is sufficient evidence of impact to establish its financial or practical consequences. 

The 2024 reforms to the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) require the Court to consider the economic effect of family violence when assessing contributions and future needs. This statutory approach builds on the principle in Kennon v Kennon (1997) FLC 92-757, where a Kennon adjustment could arise if family violence made a party’s contributions significantly more arduous. The reforms also reinforce the relevance of financial abuse within the definition of family violence in section 4AB. 

For high-value property pools, these arguments are often evidence-intensive. The focus is on tracing how the conduct affected earning capacity, asset accumulation, liabilities, business interests, access to financial resources, or the ability to contribute during the relationship and separation. 

How Does Family Violence Affect a Property Settlement Under the Family Law Act? 

Under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), family violence may affect a property settlement where it has had a financial consequence for one party, either by making their contributions more difficult or by affecting their current and future economic position. The Family Law Amendment Act 2024 (Cth) made these considerations express within the statutory property settlement framework, with the relevant reforms commencing on 10 June 2025. 

For married couples, section 79(4) now requires the Court to consider the economic effect of family violence when assessing the parties’ respective contributions. This may be relevant where violence or coercive conduct increased the burden of maintaining a household, caring for children, working in a family business, preserving assets, or otherwise contributing to the relationship. 

This statutory approach develops the principle established in Kennon v Kennon (1997) FLC 92-757. In that case, the Full Court recognised that family violence could affect the assessment of contributions where the conduct had a discernible impact and made one party’s contributions significantly more arduous. What is commonly described as a Kennon adjustment was therefore never a separate entitlement or fixed percentage. It was a way of recognising that apparently similar contributions may have been made under materially different circumstances. 

The reforms also direct attention to the continuing financial consequences of family violence when the Court considers the parties’ future circumstances. For high-net-worth parties, those consequences may arise through impaired earning capacity, reduced participation in a business, liabilities incurred without genuine consent, restricted access to capital, disrupted professional advancement or loss of control over investments and other income-producing assets. 

Section 4AB definition is relevant because family violence extends beyond physical violence. It encompasses coercive or controlling conduct that causes fear, and the statutory framework expressly recognises forms of financial abuse. In a property settlement, however, establishing the conduct is only part of the analysis. The Court must still consider what financial or practical effect that conduct had. 

That distinction is reflected in authorities including Spagnardi & Spagnardi [2003] FamCA 905 and Keating & Keating [2019] FamCAFC 46. These cases illustrate why evidence of impact matters. A party advancing the argument must connect the family violence to the way contributions were made or to its economic consequences, rather than relying on the existence of violence alone. 

What Does the Court Consider When Family Violence Has Affected a Property Settlement? 

The Court’s task is not to assign a financial value to family violence as if it were a separate head of compensation. Instead, it considers whether the conduct had a demonstrated effect on the way contributions were made or on a party’s current and future financial circumstances. Sections 79(4)(ca) and 79(5)(a) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) now make both enquiries express parts of the property settlement framework. 

What evidence is needed to show the economic effect of family violence? 

The strongest cases usually establish a clear connection between the conduct and its financial consequences. That evidence of impact may come from financial records, business documents, employment history, medical or psychological evidence, communications between the parties, bank statements, loan documents, tax records, or evidence about how responsibilities were divided within the relationship. 

For a business owner or professional, the relevant effect may be less visible than an immediate loss of assets. Family violence may have restricted participation in a business, interrupted career progression, prevented independent investment decisions, or reduced a party’s capacity to generate income. The legislation expressly recognises that economic or financial abuse can include controlling money or assets, interfering with employment or income, or causing liabilities to be incurred without genuine financial autonomy. 

How does family violence affect the assessment of contributions? 

Under section 79(4)(ca), the Court considers whether family violence affected a party’s ability to make financial, non-financial, homemaker or parenting contributions. This is the statutory context in which the principle from Kennon v Kennon remains important. 

A Kennon adjustment is therefore not awarded merely because violence is established. The relevant question is whether the violence materially altered the circumstances in which contributions were made, including whether those contributions became more difficult or burdensome. That approach reflects the reasoning developed in Kennon and subsequently examined in cases including Spagnardi & Spagnardi and Keating & Keating. 

How can family violence affect future financial circumstances? 

Section 79(5)(a) requires the Court to consider the effect of family violence on the other party’s current and future circumstances. That enquiry can intersect with income, property, financial resources, employment capacity, liabilities, housing requirements, and the practical ability to rebuild financial independence after separation. 

For high-value property pools, the analysis may therefore extend beyond conventional contributions and future needs. It may require examination of lost commercial opportunities, reduced business involvement, constrained access to capital, debt exposure, or diminished earning capacity. 

Does family violence automatically produce a larger property settlement? 

No. There is no prescribed percentage or automatic adjustment. The Court considers the proven economic effect of family violence within the overall statutory assessment and determines what orders are just and equitable in the circumstances. The strength of the argument depends on the quality of the evidence and the demonstrated connection between the conduct and its financial consequences, not on the allegation in isolation. 

What Practical Disputes Arise When Family Violence Has Financial Consequences? 

In high-value family law matters, disputes about the economic effect of family violence rarely centre on one transaction or one isolated event. More often, they arise from a sustained pattern of financial control, constrained access to assets, reduced participation in a business, disrupted earning capacity or an uneven burden of household and parenting responsibilities that affected the way wealth was created and preserved. 

The issue can be particularly significant when the parties hold interests through companies, trusts, investment structures, or family-controlled entities. One party may have been excluded from financial information, prevented from accessing accounts, pressured to sign documents, or left responsible for liabilities without meaningful involvement in the underlying decisions. In that context, financial abuse may be relevant not simply as conduct, but because of the way it affects control, autonomy, and the parties’ respective financial positions. 

Career and business disruption can also become central. A professional may have reduced working hours, declined advancement opportunities, or stepped away from a business because of the demands created by family violence. A business owner may have lost effective control of an enterprise or been prevented from participating fully in strategic or financial decisions. These matters require careful evidence of impact because the Court is concerned with the connection between the conduct and its economic consequences. 

That connection is often where the dispute becomes most contested. One party may accept that the relationship was difficult but deny that the conduct materially affected contributions, income, asset accumulation, or future earning capacity. The other may argue that violence made contributions more arduous or created continuing financial disadvantages. A Kennon adjustment or other family violence-related argument therefore depends on more than characterising the conduct. Financial records, corporate documents, employment history, communications, and professional evidence may all be needed to establish how the conduct altered the economic reality of the relationship. 

For high-net-worth parties, this analysis is especially important because a high-asset property settlement in Victoria can obscure the practical financial consequences of family violence. The Court’s focus remains on the demonstrated effect on contributions and future needs, not simply the headline value of the property available for division. 

What Should Parties Consider Before Running or Defending a Family Violence Property Argument? 

Before pursuing or defending an argument based on the economic effect of family violence, the first strategic question is whether the available evidence can establish a clear connection between the conduct and the claimed financial consequence. The Court is not asked to compensate a party for family violence as a separate wrong. The argument must be integrated into the statutory assessment of contributions and future needs. 

That distinction affects how the case should be prepared. Contemporaneous records are often more persuasive than retrospective assertions alone. Bank statements, loan documents, tax returns, company records, trust documents, employment records, medical material, and communications may help establish evidence of impact. In matters involving financial abuse, it may also be necessary to identify who controlled accounts, who authorised transactions, how liabilities were incurred, and whether one party’s access to financial information was restricted. 

For business owners and high-net-worth individuals, business valuation in family law property settlements and forensic accounting evidence may be important where the alleged impact concerns business participation, lost income, reduced equity, diverted funds, or impaired access to capital. The chronology should also be tested carefully. A claimed Kennon adjustment is stronger where the evidence shows not only that family violence occurred, but when it occurred, how it affected contributions and whether that effect continued after separation. 

Defending such a claim requires the same discipline. The issue is not necessarily whether every allegation is disputed, but whether the evidence supports the asserted economic consequence and whether that consequence is already reflected elsewhere in the property assessment. 

Early case strategy should therefore focus on evidence, causation, and avoid double counting. In complex property matters, those issues can materially influence both settlement negotiations and the way the case is presented to the Court. 

Frequently Asked Questions 

When Should You Seek Advice About Family Violence and Property Settlement? 

Where family violence has affected finances, business interests, earning capacity or the way contributions were made during a relationship, those consequences may now be directly relevant to the Court’s property settlement assessment. The strength of any argument will depend on the available evidence of impact, the connection between the conduct and its economic consequences, and how those consequences interact with the broader property pool. 

For business owners, professionals and high-net-worth individuals, early advice can be particularly important where companies, trusts, investments, or significant liabilities are involved. Our family law team advises on complex property settlement matters involving substantial assets and financial structures. 

To discuss how family violence may affect your property settlement position, you can book a confidential consultation. 

This article is general information only and not legal advice. For advice specific to your circumstances, please contact our team.