Barrister and Solicitor
Hayder Shkara is the principal of Melbourne Family Lawyers. He took over the management of the practice from Silvio Auditore in 2022.
Hayder is an ex-Olympic athlete, and has now channeled his energy into the family law space. He brings vast experience in family law, including financial and property settlements, divorce, custody matters, wills and estate, consent orders and binding financial agreements. He is excellent communicator and holds well before a Judge and Magistrate in legal proceedings. He is also great with clients, able to build close connections with them.
Hayder has a double degree from the University of Technology Sydney with a Bachelor of Laws and Communication (Journalism).
Hayder is also the principal of Justice Family Lawyers, a firm he founded after competing at the Rio de Janeiro Olympics, representing Australia in Taekwondo. Born of an Iraqi father and Japanese mother, family and a strong sense of community have always been central to the Shkara household.
He is committed to MelbourneFamily Lawyers and the team, overlooking all the matters and providing detailed support to his staff and clients. He values hard work and dedication, as an athlete, and will provide endless guidance to his team and clients.
When Hayder isn’t demonstrating his dedication to the firm, he is playing soccer with friends or coaching sports on the weekends.
Related Articles & Cases
Divorce and Inheritance Laws in Australia: What You Need to Know
Divorce and inheritance are two critical aspects of family law that can significantly impact individuals and families in Australia.
Our property settlement lawyers will run through the intricacies of divorce and inheritance laws in Australia, shedding light on what individuals should consider when navigating these complex legal matters.
Divorce Laws in Australia
Australia operates under a no-fault divorce system, where couples can obtain a divorce without proving the other party’s fault or wrongdoing.
To file for divorce, either spouse must meet the following eligibility criteria:
1. Separation: The couple must have lived separately for at least 12 months before applying for a divorce. If they still live together under one roof during this period, they must provide evidence of their separation.
2. Jurisdiction: Either spouse must be an Australian citizen, have permanent residency, or consider Australia their home and have lived there for at least a year before applying for a divorce.
Upon meeting these requirements, the divorce process can begin by applying to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. After the court grants the divorce, the dissolution of the marriage is finalised one month and one day after the hearing.
Inheritance Laws in Australia
Inheritance laws, also known as succession laws, govern the distribution of a deceased person’s assets among their beneficiaries.
These laws apply when a person dies with or without a valid will. In Australia, inheritance laws are primarily determined at the state and territory levels, as they fall under their jurisdiction.
Key aspects of inheritance laws include:
1. Testate Succession: When a person dies with a valid will, their estate will be distributed according to their wishes outlined in the will.
2. Intestate Succession: When a person dies without a valid will, the intestacy rules come into play. The distribution of assets will follow a predetermined hierarchy, which typically prioritises the spouse and children, followed by other relatives.
Effect of Divorce on Inheritance Rights
It is essential to note that divorce does not automatically revoke or nullify a person’s inheritance rights in Australia.
1. Intestacy Rules: Australian law determines the distribution of the deceased’s assets if a person dies without leaving a valid will (intestate). The surviving spouse may be entitled to a significant portion of the estate, especially if no children are involved.
2. Updating the Will: To prevent an ex-spouse from inheriting, it is crucial to update the will after divorce. When an individual remarries, their will is automatically revoked, but this is not the case with divorce. Therefore, it is essential to create a new will that aligns with the individual’s current wishes and circumstances after divorce.
3. Binding Financial Agreements: Couples who want to protect their assets in the event of a divorce can enter into a Binding Financial Agreement (BFA) before or during marriage or after separation. A BFA allows individuals to specify how their assets will be divided in case of divorce, potentially safeguarding inheritance rights.
Helping Our Clients: Divorce and Inheritance
We received a call from Carlos, a divorced engineer seeking our assistance updating his will to safeguard his assets and prevent his ex-spouse from inheriting.
During our meeting, we carefully reviewed his existing will and divorce decree to assess the legal implications and potential risks.
We drafted a comprehensive new will that addressed his concerns and distributed his estate according to his preferences, keeping his loved ones in mind.
By taking these steps, we empowered Carlos to secure his assets and provide for his chosen beneficiaries, ensuring his peace of mind and a stable financial future.
Always Seek Legal Advice: Divorce and Inheritance
Navigating divorce and inheritance laws in Australia can be complex and emotionally challenging.
Understanding the legal implications of divorce on inheritance rights and taking proactive steps to update the will and protect assets are essential aspects to consider.
Contrary to popular belief, child custody according to statistics by gender indicate that fathers in Australia are not inherently disadvantaged when it comes to child custody decisions.
Instead, the courts focus on making decisions in the child’s best interests, regardless of the parent’s gender.
Remember, custody decisions are made on a case-by-case basis and there is no one-size-fits-all solution.
Child custody has been the subject of extensive debate over the years, particularly in terms of gender. This article will examine these child custody statistics as well as the Australian laws and regulations governing child custody.
What Is Child Custody Gender Bias?
Gender bias in child custody cases occurs when a judge is influenced by the parent’s gender rather than the child’s best interests.
In Australia, family law legislation mandates that the court consider the child’s best interests when determining parenting arrangements.
This indicates that the court should not consider the parent’s gender when determining which parent should have custody.
Many believe that, despite the legislation, there is still a maternal preference in child custody cases.
This belief is founded on the historical stereotype that women are superior caregivers and nurturers to men.
However, this bias is not supported by empirical evidence. Studies have shown that children benefit from having a positive relationship with both parents, regardless of gender.
In fact, the Family Law Act 1975 explicitly states that children have the right to have a meaningful relationship with both parents, and it is the responsibility of parents to facilitate this relationship.
The law also recognizes that both parents have equal shared parental responsibility for their children, which means that they are both responsible for making important decisions about their children’s upbringing.
Child Custody Statistics by Gender in Australia
According to the Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS), child custody statistics by gender are as follows:
Mothers and Child Custody
- Approximately 80% of custodial parents are mothers.
- More than 90% of the time, the mother is the primary custodial parent in cases where the court-approved joint custody arrangements. This means that the mother has the majority of day-to-day decision making with respect to the child or children.
Fathers and Child Custody
- Fathers gain sole custody in approximately 10% of all cases.
- In around 11% of cases, they are the primary custodial parent.
- They share custody in about 7% of cases.
- Only about 3% of separated parents use the court system as their primary method for determining custody arrangements; these families are primarily affected by family violence, child safety concerns, and other complex issues.
- Most separated parents, or approximately 97%, do not go to court to determine their child custody arrangements, while 16% utilise family dispute resolution services or lawyers.
- In approximately 83% of cases, the mother provides at least 53% of the care for the children, whereas, in only 7% of cases, the father provides at least 53% of the care.
- Despite gender bias, 81.2% of sole custody cases are awarded to the mother. 53% of judge-decided cases involve orders for primary parental responsibility, while 93% of parent-resolved cases involve orders for shared parental responsibility.
The Explanation Behind Child Custody Statistics by Gender
In Australia, the rate of sole custody granted to mothers is higher for a variety of reasons.
One explanation for this is that, historically, mothers have been the primary caregivers for children, especially during their early years.
This may lead to the conclusion that mothers are better equipped to meet the physical, emotional, and developmental requirements of the child.
In the event of separation or divorce, mothers are also more likely to seek custody of their children.
This could be due to a variety of factors, including the need for financial support and the desire to maintain a close relationship with their child.
Note, however, that the Family Law Act of 1975 (Cth) mandates courts to consider the child’s best interests when making custody decisions.
This means that gender is irrelevant when determining custody arrangements. Depending on the specific circumstances of each instance, the court may grant sole custody to the mother or the father.
It is also important to note that joint custody arrangements permit both parents to share parental responsibilities, which can be advantageous for the child’s well-being and growth.
In Australia, joint custody arrangements are now the most prevalent form of custody arrangement.
How Can Gender Bias Affect Child Custody?
Gender bias in child custody cases can influence the decision-making process in a variety of ways.
Here are some examples:
- Presumptions of Parental Roles: Historically, there has been a presumption that mothers are better caregivers and that fathers are breadwinners. This can result in a bias towards mothers in child custody cases, with judges assuming that children are better off with their mothers.
- Stereotypes: Gender stereotypes can also influence child custody decisions. For instance, judges may assume that fathers are less nurturing or emotionally supportive than mothers.
- Cultural and Religious Beliefs: Cultural and religious beliefs may also play a role in child custody decisions. In some cultures, for instance, it is expected that women will provide primary care, which may lead to a bias in favor of mothers.
Also read: Can You Withdraw from a Child Custody Case?
How to Avoid Gender Bias?
It is essential to avoid gender bias in child custody cases to ensure that decisions are made in the child’s best interests. Here are some ways to avoid gender bias in child custody:
- Education and Awareness: Legal professionals and judges can identify and avoid gender biases through education and awareness. They can become aware of their own biases and learn how to make decisions that are not influenced by gender stereotypes through training programs and workshops.
- Focus on the Best Interests of the Child: Legal practitioners and judges should focus on the best interests of the child when making custody decisions. This requires them to consider the child’s relationship with both parents, emotional and physical needs, and desires.
- Avoid Presumptions: Presumptions that one parent is more suitable for custody based on gender should be avoided. Each case should be evaluated on its own merits, taking into account the unique circumstances of each family.
- Use Objective Criteria: Legal professionals should use objective criteria when evaluating each parent’s fitness for custody. This may include the parent’s ability to meet the child’s physical, emotional, and psychological needs, as well as the parent’s involvement in the child’s life and relationship with the child.
- Monitor and Review Decisions: Finally, legal professionals should monitor and review custody decisions to ensure that they are not influenced by gender biases. This may entail examining the decision-making procedure, evaluating the factors considered, and modifying the decision as necessary.
Decisions regarding child custody are made with the child’s best interests in mind.
Despite the widespread belief that mothers are more likely to be awarded custody, statistics indicate that this is not the case.
Instead, the courts make decisions based on the child’s best interests, independent of the gender of the parents.
When making custody decisions, consideration is given to the child’s age and needs, each parent’s capacity to provide for the child, and the child’s relationship with each parent.
The ultimate goal is establishing a custody arrangement that allows the child to flourish and develop in a safe and nurturing environment.
If you find yourself in the midst of a custody disagreement, it’s advisable to seek the guidance of an experienced child custody lawyer to safeguard both your rights and your child’s well-being.
In the complex landscape of family law, the term “mistress law” may not be legal jargon.
Still, it has become a colloquial expression to describe the legal implications surrounding extra-marital relationships in Australia.
This article delves into the intricate aspects of mistress law, exploring whether an extra-marital affair can be considered a de facto relationship and what measures can be taken to protect property when entering such a relationship.
Is An Extra-Marital Affair A De Facto Relationship?
The concept of a de facto relationship in Australia is defined under the Family Law Act 1975.
It refers to a relationship between two adults who live together on a genuine domestic basis but are not legally married.
In the context of mistress law, an extra-marital affair may or may not be considered a de facto relationship.
The court will look at various factors such as the nature and extent of the common residence, the length of the relationship, financial dependence, ownership of property, and the care and support of children.
An extra-marital affair might be considered a de facto relationship if it meets the legal criteria.
What Can Be Done To Protect Your Property If You Are Entering Into An Extra-Marital Relationship?
Entering an extra-marital relationship can have significant legal implications, especially concerning property rights. Here’s what you can do to protect your assets:
1. Binding Financial Agreement (BFA): A BFA is a legal agreement that outlines how assets will be divided if the relationship ends. It can be entered before, during, or after a de facto relationship or marriage.
2. Legal Consultation: Engaging a family lawyer experienced in mistress law can provide tailored advice on protecting your assets. They can help draft agreements that suit your unique situation.
3. Transparency with Partner: Open communication with your partner about financial expectations and agreements can prevent misunderstandings and legal disputes down the line.
4. Understanding De Facto Laws: Familiarise yourself with the laws governing de facto relationships in your state or territory, as they may vary across Australia.
John Thompson, found himself in a precarious situation. Married to Sara Thompson for 15 years, John had begun an extra-marital relationship with Emily Davis, a colleague.
When Sara discovered the affair, she filed for divorce, and Emily subsequently claimed a share in John’s assets, arguing that their relationship constituted a de facto relationship.
We had to delve into the intimate details of John and Emily’s relationship to determine whether it met the legal criteria for a de facto relationship.
This involved examining their shared financial responsibilities, time spent together, and the nature of their relationship.
We meticulously reviewed financial records, property ownership, and other evidence to build a strong case.
The case required us to navigate the intricate landscape of family law, including the definitions and implications of de facto relationships in Australia.
After a thorough examination of the evidence, the court ruled in our favour, determining that John and Emily’s relationship did not meet the criteria for a de facto relationship.
The secretive nature of the affair and the lack of a shared residence were key factors in the decision.
Emily’s claim was dismissed, and John’s assets remained protected. The case was a significant victory for our firm and a reminder of the complexities surrounding mistress law.
Always Seek Legal Assistance
Mistress law in Australia is a multifaceted subject that intertwines with family law, de facto relationships, and property rights—understanding whether an extra-marital affair qualifies as a de facto relationship and taking proactive steps to protect property.
Legal consultation is often advisable to navigate the complexities of mistress law, ensuring that individual rights and assets are safeguarded.
The landscape of extra-marital relationships is ever-evolving, reflecting the changing dynamics of relationships in contemporary Australian society.
Divorce can be emotionally tiring, and one of the most significant concerns for couples is the division of assets.
The legal system in Australia follows a specific asset distribution approach to ensure fairness and equity.
The division is not a simple 50/50 split but rather a complex process that considers various factors such as financial contributions, non-financial contributions, future needs, and the overall fairness of the division.
The court aims to achieve a just and equitable distribution of assets.
This article written by our property settlement lawyers discusses how are assets divided in a divorce Australia based on the relevant laws and guidelines.
How Are Assets Defined?
Assets include real estate, cars, savings, shares, inheritances, compensations, redundancy packages, lottery wins, and even superannuation benefits.
Liabilities like debts, mortgages, and loans are also considered. Financial resources, which are future financial benefits like pensions or anticipated inheritances, are also considered but often treated separately.
What’s the Process for Dividing Assets in a Divorce?
The division of assets in Australia follows a four-step process:
1. Valuing The Assets
In this initial step, both parties must disclose all their assets and liabilities.
This includes everything from real estate and vehicles to savings accounts, shares, and superannuation benefits.
The goal is to understand the couple’s financial situation comprehensively.
These assets and liabilities are then valued to determine the total net asset pool.
Being transparent and honest during this phase is crucial, as hiding assets can lead to legal repercussions.
- Full financial disclosure is mandatory.
- Assets acquired before, during, or after the marriage are included.
- Liabilities like debts and loans are also factored in.
2. Valuing The Contributions of Each Party
Once the asset pool is defined, the court assesses the contributions made by each party.
These contributions can be financial, such as income earned, or non-financial, like homemaking and childcare.
Even indirect contributions like gifts or inheritances are considered.
The court will then adjust the asset pool based on these contributions, often on a percentage basis.
- Both financial and non-financial contributions are assessed.
- Contributions can be direct or indirect.
- The timing of contributions (before or during the marriage) can also be a factor.
3. Calculating Future Needs
This step involves looking ahead to each party’s future financial needs.
Various factors are considered, such as age, health, income, earning capacity, and the care and support of children.
For instance, if one party has primary custody of young children, that could impact their earning capacity and may warrant a larger share of the assets.
- Age, health, and income are significant factors.
- Care and support of children can influence asset division.
- New relationships and their financial implications may also be considered.
4. Considering The Practical Effect
Finally, the court evaluates whether the proposed asset division is just and equitable.
This sort of “sanity check” ensures a fair and practical division for both parties.
The court will look at the totality of the circumstances, including any adjustments made for future needs, to arrive at a final, fair division.
- The court aims for a just and equitable division.
- This is the final review to ensure fairness.
- Most cases result in a 50-65% division to one party.
Do I Have to Go to Court to Split Assets?
No, you don’t have to go to court. Couples are encouraged to agree on asset division through mediation or legal advice.
If an agreement is reached, it can be formalised through a financial agreement or a consent order from the court.
What Are the Time Limits?
For married couples, if you get a divorce and still need to sort out your property arrangements, you must apply to court for property orders within 12 months of your divorce becoming final.
For de facto relationships, the time limit is two years from the date of separation.
How We Can Provide Assistance: In a Divorce How Are Assets Divided
We recently had the opportunity to assist a successful restaurant owner contemplating filing for divorce from her husband.
The client was particularly concerned about how the assets would be divided, given the value of her business and other joint assets.
She was understandably anxious about her restaurant, a business she had built from the ground up.
Our first step was to assure her that we would provide tailored advice to protect her interests.
We began by asking the client to list all her and her husband’s assets and liabilities, including the restaurant, real estate, and shared debts.
We advised her to be transparent and honest, as full financial disclosure is mandatory in these cases. We then worked with financial experts to accurately value these assets.
The client was the primary financial contributor due to her successful restaurant, while her husband had been more involved in homemaking and childcare.
We explained that both financial and non-financial contributions would be considered in the division of assets.
Considering her age, health, and earning capacity, we discussed the client’s future needs.
Given that she would likely retain custody of their children, we considered how this would impact her future financial needs.
We also considered her husband’s future needs, including his lower earning capacity.
Finally, we ran through various scenarios with the client to show how different divisions of assets would impact her.
We sought a just, equitable, practical division for her business and personal life.
Seek Legal Assistance
Navigating asset division process in a divorce is no walk in the park.
Each step is fraught with legal intricacies that require a nuanced understanding of Australian Family Law.
While this guide offers a comprehensive overview, it’s essential to remember that each divorce case is unique, with its own set of challenges and complexities.
Therefore, seeking professional legal assistance to guide you through this challenging time is always advisable.
A qualified family lawyer can provide tailored advice that aligns with your specific circumstances, ensuring that the division of assets is as fair and equitable as possible.
Vaccine custody disputes have become increasingly prevalent in today’s society, particularly amidst the global effort to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.
With the rollout of vaccination programs, questions regarding vaccine custody and decision-making authority have emerged, leading to legal complexities and disputes.
This article aims to provide an overview of the laws surrounding vaccine custody disputes in Australia, offering insights into the legal framework and considerations in such cases.
Legal Framework in Australia
In Australia, the legal framework for vaccine custody disputes primarily revolves around the rights and responsibilities of parents, guardians, and the best interests of the child. The Family Law Act 1975 governs such matters, focusing on the welfare and protection of children involved in custody disputes.
The concept of shared parental responsibility forms the foundation of vaccine custody disputes. Under the Family Law Act, unless there are specific court orders in place, both parents have equal responsibility for making decisions about their child’s upbringing, including matters related to healthcare, which encompasses vaccinations.
Best Interests of the Child
When resolving vaccine custody disputes, the court always considers the best interests of the child as the paramount consideration. The court assesses various factors, including the child’s health, safety, and emotional well-being, along with the views of the child (if they are mature enough to express them).
Dispute Resolution Processes
Before resorting to litigation, parties involved in vaccine custody disputes are encouraged to explore alternative dispute resolution methods. Mediation, negotiation, and family dispute resolution services are available to help parents reach a mutually agreeable solution, focusing on the best interests of the child.
Also read: Gaining Custody of a Child With Autism
In situations where parents cannot reach a consensus regarding vaccination, they may approach the Family Court of Australia or the Federal Circuit Court for resolution. These courts have the power to make binding decisions regarding vaccine custody disputes.
When considering vaccine custody disputes, the court takes into account several factors, including:
a) Expert medical evidence: The court may consider expert medical evidence regarding the benefits and risks of vaccination, including any specific circumstances or concerns related to the child’s health.
b) Previous vaccination history: The court may assess the child’s previous vaccination history and the extent to which the child has received vaccines according to the recommended schedule.
c) Consistency and stability: The court examines the consistency and stability of the child’s vaccination history, giving weight to maintaining a routine and ensuring adequate protection against preventable diseases.
Based on the evidence and circumstances presented, the court may make specific orders regarding vaccination. These orders can range from requiring parents to vaccinate their child according to the recommended schedule to allowing exemptions or imposing conditions related to vaccination.
Public Health Imperatives
While the court strives to uphold the best interests of the child, it also considers broader public health imperatives. In cases where the court deems vaccination necessary for the child’s welfare or to protect the community, it may prioritise the child’s immunisation despite parental objections.
How We Can Help
In a recent vaccine custody dispute, our law firm successfully assisted Terry, a distressed client in a contentious situation. With the ongoing pandemic as the backdrop, Terry faced a disagreement with her ex-partner regarding their child’s vaccination.
We swiftly delved into the complex legal landscape surrounding vaccine custody disputes in Australia. Guiding Terry through her parental rights and responsibilities, our custody lawyer emphasised the child’s best interests and the importance of alternative dispute resolution methods.
With meticulous preparation and compelling evidence, including medical opinions and vaccination records, we built a strong case. Advocating for the child’s welfare, we highlighted the benefits of immunisation and the risks of withholding vaccines.
Thanks to our expertise, Terry achieved a favourable outcome. The court issued an order prioritising the child’s best interests, allowing the continuation of the vaccination schedule with appropriate exemptions to address health concerns.
Always Put the Child’s Best Interests First
Vaccine custody disputes can be emotionally charged and legally complex, requiring careful consideration of the child’s best interests and public health imperatives.
In Australia, the legal framework surrounding these disputes emphasises shared parental responsibility, the best interests of the child, and court intervention when necessary.
Parents involved in vaccine custody disputes must seek legal advice and explore dispute resolution processes to find a resolution that safeguards the child’s well-being and ensures their protection against preventable diseases.
The legal landscape surrounding family disputes in Australia has significantly shifted towards alternative dispute resolution methods.
Collaborative Family Law has emerged as a compassionate and practical approach that fosters cooperation, communication, and mutual respect in resolving family conflicts.
Let’s discover the key aspects of this collaborative process in Australia, highlighting its benefits, legal framework, and role in promoting amicable settlements.
Collaborative Family Law Defined
Collaborative Family Law is an alternative dispute resolution process that allows separating or divorcing couples to work together in a supportive and non-adversarial manner to reach mutually acceptable agreements.
This approach focuses on resolving conflicts outside the courtroom, minimising emotional stress, promoting effective communication, and protecting the entire family’s best interests.
Collaborative Family Law in Australia is supported by the Family Law Act 1975, which emphasises the importance of resolving family disputes without litigation.
The Act encourages parties to consider alternative dispute resolution methods, including collaborative processes, mediation, and arbitration.
This process operates within this legal framework, allowing families to navigate the complexities of separation or divorce cooperatively and respectfully.
Benefits of Collaborative Family Law
- Preservation of Relationships: Unlike traditional litigation, this process emphasises preserving relationships, especially when children are involved. By reducing conflict and promoting open communication, this approach lays the foundation for healthier co-parenting and post-separation relationships.
- Cost-Effective and Efficient: This system is generally more cost-effective and efficient than court proceedings. With a focus on settlement rather than prolonged litigation, parties can save significant time, money, and emotional strain.
- Empowerment and Ownership: Collaborative Law empowers parties to actively participate in shaping the outcome. It allows for greater control over the decision-making process and ensures that the solutions align with each family member’s specific needs and priorities.
Drawbacks of Collaborative Family Law
- Dependence on Willing Participation: For Collaborative Family Law to succeed, all parties involved must willingly engage in the process. If one party is uncooperative or unwilling to participate actively, it can hinder progress and potentially derail the collaborative efforts, requiring a shift to traditional litigation.
- Potential Need for Additional Experts: While Collaborative Family Law involves a team of professionals, some cases may require specialised expertise beyond the collaborative team’s scope. This could include forensic accountants, child psychologists, or other specialists. The need to engage additional experts can increase costs and extend the overall timeline of the collaborative process.
- Potential Imbalance of Power: In situations with a significant power imbalance, Collaborative Family Law may not provide adequate protection or support for the disadvantaged party. This could occur in domestic violence, financial disparity, or when one party has more assertive representation. In such circumstances, alternative methods that ensure all parties’ safety and equitable treatment may be more appropriate.
It is essential for individuals considering Collaborative Family Law to assess their specific circumstances carefully, to pick an experienced family lawyer, and weigh the potential drawbacks against the benefits before choosing this alternative dispute resolution method.
You can speak to Melbourne Family Lawyers about the benefits of collaborative family law today.
Assisting Our Clients: Collaborative Family Law
We recently had the privilege of assisting Sam and Georgia, a couple who had recently ended their relationship and were going through the challenging journey of separation.
We assisted the couple by conducting joint meetings where both parties expressed their concerns and interests. Through this process, we came up with creative options and brainstormed solutions that meet the needs of each family member.
We reached a mutually acceptable agreement through transparent negotiations.
We finalised the agreement and implemented it legally. Through diligent negotiations and compromises, they reached a mutually acceptable agreement.
We continued to help by drafting the agreement and having them review it afterwards. We assisted in facilitating the signing of the agreement and ensuring all legal formalities were completed.
Collaborative Family Law Can Be Beneficial
Collaborative Family Law is a progressive and compassionate approach to resolving family disputes in Australia.
This alternative dispute resolution method offers families a viable and beneficial alternative to courtroom battles by prioritising open communication, cooperation, and customised solutions.
As more individuals embrace the principles of Collaborative Family Law, it is evident that this approach can reshape how families navigate separation and divorce, fostering amicable resolutions that prioritise the well-being of all parties involved.