Seventeen years, money every month, and still not a de facto relationship

This is a threshold question, not a detail. If you were in a de facto relationship, the Family Law Act applies and the property provisions are open to you. If you were not, there is no jurisdiction, and you are left arguing equitable claims in the Supreme Court, which is slower and more expensive.

Section 4AA says a de facto relationship exists where two people who are not married to each other and not related by family have, having regard to all the circumstances, a relationship as a couple living together on a genuine domestic basis. It then lists nine circumstances the court may consider, and says immediately that no particular finding on any of them is necessary.

How long the relationship lasted.
The nature and extent of any common residence.
Whether a sexual relationship exists.
Financial dependence or interdependence, and any arrangements for support.
Ownership, use and acquisition of property.
The degree of mutual commitment to a shared life.
Whether the relationship is or was registered under a state or territory law.
The care and support of children.
The reputation and public aspects of the relationship.

A list of nine factors with no minimum score is not much use on its own. The case below is what gives it shape.

The case

Jonah & White

[2011] FamCA 221, appeal dismissed [2012] FamCAFC 200 · Family Court of Australia, Murphy J; Full Court on appeal

What happened: A relationship of about seventeen years between a woman and a man who was married with children throughout. He contributed $24,000 toward her house and paid her a monthly sum, at times up to $3,000 a month, for eleven years. They saw each other roughly two days every second or third weekend and travelled overseas together for two and a half weeks at a time. The sexual relationship was, on her account, exclusive.
What the court decided: Not a de facto relationship. The key, the court said, is the manifestation of coupledom: the merger of two individual lives into life as a couple. Living together only part of each week does not rule that out, and keeping separate homes is not fatal. What was missing here was the merger itself. They kept separate households, had no joint finances or property, rarely mixed with each other's friends, had no reputation as a couple, and he consistently made clear he would choose his wife and family.

The full judgment is published under this citation on AustLII.

What else has to be satisfied

Establishing the relationship is only the first gate. To bring a property claim you also generally need the relationship to have lasted at least two years, or for there to be a child, or for you to have made substantial contributions such that serious injustice would follow if no order were made, or for the relationship to have been registered. There is a geographical requirement as well.

There is also a time limit. Applications between de facto partners are brought within two years of separation, and after that you need the court's permission. That deadline catches people who spend eighteen months trying to resolve things privately.

If your situation is anywhere near the line, the practical advice is unglamorous. Registering the relationship in Victoria puts the question beyond argument, and it takes an afternoon.

This article is general information about Australian law, not legal advice, and it is current as at 7 July 2026. Every family is different and the law changes. Speak to a lawyer about your own circumstances before you act.

What else has to be satisfied

Advice on your own circumstances