Separation Declaration Australia | s.90DA Family Law Act

A separation declaration is a written statement, signed by one or both former partners, confirming that they have separated and setting out the separation date. It is not a court order and it does not by itself end a marriage or a de facto relationship. What it does is fix the fact and timing of separation in a form that courts, government agencies and financial institutions accept as evidence.

The term carries a precise technical meaning in one context. Under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), a separation declaration is the specific written declaration required by section 90DA before the property provisions of a married couple's binding financial agreement can take effect, with the equivalent for de facto couples sitting in section 90UF and the superannuation-splitting version in section 90XP. In everyday practice the phrase is used more broadly for any written record of separation you might attach to a divorce application, a Centrelink review, or a lender's file. This template covers both uses: the strict statutory declaration that switches on a financial agreement, and the general-purpose statement of separation that proves your relationship status to a third party. The separated under one roof statement is the companion document for the situation Australian families increasingly face, where money, a mortgage or the children mean nobody has moved out yet.

The controlling statute is the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), and the word doing the heavy lifting throughout is "separated". Its meaning comes from section 48, as affected by section 49, and every separation declaration ultimately borrows that definition. Separation is a question of fact, not of address. A couple can be separated in law while still sharing a kitchen, because what matters is that the relationship has broken down, that at least one person formed and communicated the intention to separate, and that the parties then conducted themselves consistently with the relationship being over. Section 49(2) makes the point explicit by confirming that people can be taken to have separated even though they continued to live in the same residence.

Where a binding financial agreement is involved, the requirement becomes formal. Section 90DA provides that the property-related parts of a married couple's financial agreement have no force until a separation declaration is made, with section 90UF mirroring this for de facto relationships and section 90XP governing declarations that release superannuation. A declaration under these provisions must state that the spouses separated and, at the declaration time, that there is no reasonable likelihood of cohabitation resuming. Getting that wording right is not optional decoration; it is the switch that gives your agreement legal effect over the property it divides.

The administrative side is governed by Services Australia rather than the Court. If you receive a Centrelink payment and remain at the same address as your former partner, you are expected to complete the Relationship Details, Separated Under One Roof form, and the accuracy of your separation date and circumstances directly affects whether you are paid at single or partnered rates. The Federal Circuit and Family Court applies the same section 48 separation test when a divorce turns on a period lived under one roof, usually asking for corroborating evidence such as an affidavit from a third party. For the primary source on how the twelve-month separation requirement is assessed, the Family Court of Australia's guidance on separation under the one roof sets out what the Court looks for. You can review the official position through the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia divorce and separation guidance. This document is drafted to sit comfortably alongside a binding financial agreement under section 90B of the Family Law Act when a formal declaration is what triggers the property split.

The most frequent trigger is a Centrelink assessment. When a former couple keeps sharing an address, Services Australia needs to decide whether to pay each person as a single or as a partnered claimant, and a clean written declaration of the separation date and the changed living arrangements is what supports the single rate. The next common scenario is a divorce application that relies on twelve months of separation lived under the one roof, where the Court expects the parties to explain, in a signed statement, how the relationship changed even though the address did not. A binding financial agreement creates a third, stricter need: without a compliant declaration under section 90DA or section 90UF, the property clauses simply do not come into force.

Banks and lenders form a quieter fourth audience. When you refinance to take one name off a joint mortgage, or release a partner from a loan, the lender often wants documentary confirmation that the relationship has ended and when. A short edge case worth flagging: some people try to backdate a separation to capture a more favourable Centrelink or property outcome, then find the date contradicted by a lease, a joint holiday booking, or a social media post. Use one consistent separation date across every form and conversation, because inconsistency is the single fastest way to trigger a review. A second edge case involves family violence, where separation under one roof may be unsafe; in those situations the practical arrangements in a parenting plan under section 63C often matter more urgently than the paperwork of a declaration.

• The statement of separation and separation date is the heart of the document. It records that the parties have separated, fixes the exact date the relationship broke down, and confirms, in the words section 90DA expects, that there is no reasonable likelihood of cohabitation resuming. This single sentence is what a court, a lender or Services Australia reads first.
• The relationship characterisation clause identifies whether the parties were married or in a de facto relationship, which determines whether section 90DA, section 90UF or section 90XP applies and changes the precise language the declaration must carry.
• The separated under one roof particulars describe the changed living arrangements in concrete terms: separate sleeping arrangements, the division of finances and domestic tasks, the ending of a shared social life, and who was told and when. These are the facts Services Australia and the Court weigh, so the template prompts you for the specifics rather than leaving you to guess.
• The third-party corroboration section provides space for a supporting statement from a friend, family member or professional who can confirm the separation, mirroring the affidavit evidence the Federal Circuit and Family Court routinely asks for in under-one-roof divorces.
• The declaration and execution block sets out the signing formalities, including the option for one or both parties to sign, and is drafted so the declaration can stand alone or be included within a financial agreement as section 90DA permits.

The Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) is Commonwealth legislation and applies uniformly across every state and territory, so the core separation declaration wording does not change whether you are in Sydney or Perth. What varies is the surrounding machinery.

New South Wales and Victoria generate the largest volume of under-one-roof divorce applications, and the Federal Circuit and Family Court registries in those states are well used to requesting a corroborating affidavit before granting a divorce where separation was lived at a shared address. Preparing that supporting statement at the same time as the declaration saves a later request.

Queensland families often encounter the declaration through property settlement rather than divorce, given the state's high rate of de facto relationships; here the section 90UF de facto pathway, rather than the section 90DA married pathway, is the one to check. Related financial documentation such as a limited child support agreement under the Child Support Act 1989 frequently accompanies the separation record.

Western Australia is the important exception to watch. For de facto couples, family law property matters in that state are dealt with under the Family Court Act 1997 (WA) rather than the Commonwealth Act, so a de facto separation declaration prepared in WA should be checked against the state legislation. Married couples in WA remain under the Commonwealth Family Law Act 1975. Across all states, a broader separation agreement under the Family Law Act 1975 can carry the practical terms while the declaration handles the bare fact and date of separation.

You begin by confirming whether you were married or in a de facto relationship, because that choice sets which sections of the Family Law Act 1975 the declaration relies on and adjusts the wording accordingly. From there you enter the separation date, and the form asks you to be precise rather than approximate, since this date anchors everything a court, Centrelink or a bank will later assess. If you have been living under the one roof, the template opens the additional particulars section and prompts you through the specific facts that support a genuine separation: sleeping arrangements, finances, domestic responsibilities, and how the separation was communicated. You then indicate whether one or both former partners will sign, and whether the declaration will stand alone or sit inside a financial agreement. The document assembles into a clean, signable statement, and you can add a corroborating third-party statement where the Court or Services Australia is likely to want one. Once complete, you download it in Word and PDF, edit any detail that needs adjusting, and print it for signature. If your matter also involves a formal financial split, you would prepare the binding financial agreement in parallel so the declaration can trigger its property terms.

The mistake that causes the most damage is an inconsistent separation date. People give one date to Centrelink, a slightly different one on a divorce application, and a third in conversation with a lender, and every discrepancy invites a review that a single agreed date would have avoided. Closely related is treating separation as a change of address rather than a change of relationship. Because section 49 allows separation while living together, the declaration must describe how the relationship actually ended, and a statement that says nothing beyond "we separated" gives the Court and Services Australia nothing to assess. A third recurring error is continuing to present publicly as a couple, sharing a bank account, attending events together, posting jointly, while claiming to be separated under one roof; the paperwork cannot outrun conduct that contradicts it.

On the financial side, the most expensive slip is assuming a binding financial agreement works the moment it is signed. It does not: without a compliant declaration under section 90DA or section 90UF, the property provisions have no force, and couples sometimes discover this only when they try to rely on the agreement. Never backdate a separation to improve an outcome, because a false declaration to Services Australia can lead to penalties, and a false statement to the Court carries far heavier consequences. Finally, people forget that lenders are not bound by a private agreement to take one name off a loan; the declaration supports the conversation, but refinancing and release still follow the bank's own process.