Divorce in the UK and Australia: What happens when you live in different countries
- Eddison Cogan Legal Team
- 2 days ago
- 8 min read
For many internationally mobile couples, separation does not happen neatly within one legal system. It happens across time zones, continents and legal cultures.
It is increasingly common for one partner to live in England or Wales while the other resides in Australia. Careers, family ties, migration, or simply life unfolding in unexpected ways can leave couples navigating relationship breakdown from opposite sides of the world.
What often comes as a surprise is that separation is not governed by a single, universal set of rules. The legal consequences depend not only on where each person lives, but also on whether the couple is married or unmarried, and on which country’s courts become involved first.
England and Australia share a common legal heritage, but their family law systems have evolved in different ways. Those differences can have a significant impact on financial outcomes, particularly where assets, pensions or long-term earning capacity are involved, and even more so for couples who have lived together without marrying.
Why jurisdiction matters more than geography
A common assumption is that separation should be dealt with in the country where the couple last lived together, or where the relationship began. In reality, neither factor is decisive.
What matters is jurisdiction: whether a particular court has the legal authority to deal with the divorce and any related financial matters. In cross-border situations, it is sometimes possible for both England and Australia to have jurisdiction at the same time.
In some cases, couples attempt to manage separation through online mediation, often conducted via video calls across time zones, but this too carries practical and legal complexities that are easily underestimated.
Where more than one country may have jurisdiction, the country in which proceedings are issued first can become critical. Once one court is properly seized of the matter, the other may choose or be required to step back.
This is not about gaining an unfair advantage, it is about recognising that different legal systems approach fairness, financial provision and ongoing obligations in different ways. Early legal advice can be decisive in preserving options rather than closing them off.
Divorce in England and Wales: a brief overview
England and Wales now operate a no-fault divorce system. The legal process focuses on bringing the marriage to an end rather than allocating blame.
For most couples, the more complex issue is not divorce itself but the financial settlement. English courts have a wide discretion and are required to consider a range of statutory factors, including:
The welfare of any children
Each party’s income, earning capacity and financial resources
Financial needs, obligations and responsibilities
The standard of living during the marriage
Contributions made by each party, both financial and non-financial
The length of the marriage and the parties’ ages
English family law is internationally recognised for its needs-based and discretionary approach, particularly where there is a significant disparity in income or earning capacity. In appropriate cases, spousal maintenance may be ordered on an ongoing basis and is not automatically time-limited.
This flexibility can produce outcomes that feel fair and responsive to individual circumstances, but it also means results are less predictable without experienced advice.
Divorce in Australia: a different legal framework
Australia also operates a no-fault divorce system, but the structure governing financial outcomes differs in important respects.
Financial matters are dealt with under the Family Law Act 1975, which applies a structured four-step approach:
Identifying and valuing the asset pool
Assessing contributions made by each party
Considering future needs factors
Determining whether the outcome is just and equitable
While this may sound similar to the English framework, its application can produce materially different outcomes. Australian courts often place greater emphasis on initial and financial contributions, particularly in shorter relationships or where one party brought substantial assets into the relationship.
Spousal maintenance exists in Australia but is generally more limited in scope and duration than in England and Wales.
Australian superannuation is treated as a specific category of property and is subject to its own valuation and splitting rules, which can be unfamiliar to UK-based spouses.
A critical distinction: married versus unmarried couples
One of the most significant and least understood differences between England and Australia concerns unmarried cohabiting couples.
Many people assume that long-term cohabitation creates rights similar to marriage. In England and Wales, that assumption is misplaced.
Unmarried couples in England and Wales
In England and Wales, there is no concept of “common law marriage”.
Unmarried couples do not acquire automatic financial rights when a relationship ends, regardless of how long they lived together or whether they have children. Claims are typically limited to:
Property ownership disputes based on equity
Trust and land law principles
Child-related financial claims
There is no general right to spousal maintenance or to a discretionary redistribution of assets for unmarried partners. This often comes as a shock to couples who have structured their lives around an assumption of shared entitlement.
Unmarried couples in Australia
Australia takes a markedly different approach.
Under Australian family law, de facto couples may have rights broadly similar to married couples if certain criteria are met. These can include:
Living together on a genuine domestic basis
Presenting themselves as a couple
Meeting a minimum relationship duration
Having a child together
Making substantial contributions to property or family welfare
Eligible de facto partners may seek property adjustment and spousal maintenance through the family courts, subject to statutory time limits.
For couples who lived together in Australia and later separate across borders, this difference can be decisive.
Why this difference matters in cross-border cases
The distinction between married and unmarried status can dramatically alter outcomes when England and Australia are both potentially involved.
A couple who would have no financial claim at all in England and Wales may have substantial rights in Australia. Issuing proceedings in the wrong jurisdiction can extinguish rights that might otherwise exist.
This is particularly important where:
A couple lived together in Australia but later relocated
One partner returned to the UK while the other remained in Australia
Assets are held in both countries
The relationship was never formalised by marriage
Understanding which country recognises the relationship for financial purposes is essential before any legal step is taken.
When both countries may have jurisdiction
Both England and Australia may have jurisdiction where:
One partner is habitually resident in England and Wales
The other is habitually resident in Australia
One or both partners have citizenship or domicile connections
Assets are located in more than one country
In such cases, timing and coordination are critical. Issuing proceedings without understanding the cross-border implications can lock parties into a legal framework they never intended to choose.
Practical challenges couples often underestimate
Time differences
An eleven-hour time difference affects negotiations, mediation and even routine communication with advisers. Without careful management, this can slow progress and increase frustration.
Financial disclosure
Disclosure standards differ between jurisdictions. What is routine in one system may require explanation or adaptation in the other.
Enforcement and recognition of orders
Orders made in one country may require additional steps to be recognised or enforced in the other, particularly where property, pensions or superannuation are involved.
Emotional strain
Managing separation across two legal cultures can be psychologically exhausting, especially where expectations about fairness and entitlement differ.
The role of mediation in UK–Australia separation
Mediation can be a constructive option for couples separating across borders, particularly where communication has not completely broken down and there is a shared desire to resolve matters without escalating conflict.
In UK–Australia cases, mediation is frequently conducted online, using video conferencing platforms such as Zoom or similar services. This allows both parties to participate from their respective countries without the cost and disruption of international travel. Lawyers may also attend remotely or provide advice alongside the mediation process.
Online mediation can be especially attractive where couples wish to limit legal costs, preserve an ongoing parenting relationship, or approach separation in a less adversarial way.
However, there are practical limitations. An eleven-hour time difference can make scheduling sessions challenging, particularly where both parties are working, have childcare responsibilities, or require professional advisers to be present. Sessions may need to take place early in the morning for one party and late in the evening for the other, which can increase fatigue and reduce the effectiveness of negotiations.
There are also legal considerations. Any agreement reached through mediation must be carefully reviewed to ensure it is capable of being recognised and implemented in the relevant jurisdiction, and that it does not unintentionally disadvantage one party because of differences between English and Australian family law.
Mediation can therefore be valuable in cross-border cases, but it should be approached with clear legal guidance and realistic expectations, particularly where jurisdiction, financial provision or the status of an unmarried relationship is in issue.
Why dual qualification matters
Cross-border family law is not simply a matter of comparing legislation. It requires understanding how legal systems operate in practice and how they interact.
Very few solicitors are qualified to practise in both England and Wales and Australia. At Eddison Cogan Lawyers, senior solicitor Christopher Eddison-Cogan is admitted in both jurisdictions.
This allows advice to be given holistically, helping clients avoid fragmented guidance and unforeseen consequences.
When should you seek advice?
Early advice is particularly important if:
You and your partner live in different countries
You were never married but lived together in Australia
Significant assets or pensions exist in either jurisdiction
You are considering issuing proceedings
Mediation is being discussed without clarity on jurisdiction
Delay can narrow options. Early advice can preserve them.
Separation involving England and Australia is rarely straightforward. Differences in divorce law, financial frameworks and the treatment of unmarried couples can lead to very different outcomes.
Jurisdiction is not a technical footnote. It is often the central issue.
Understanding the legal landscape early can prevent costly mistakes and help couples move forward with clarity and confidence.
FAQ: UK–Australia Divorce and Separation
Can I get divorced in the UK if my spouse lives in Australia?
Yes, in some circumstances. Whether the courts in England and Wales have jurisdiction depends on factors such as habitual residence, domicile and nationality. It is sometimes possible for both countries to have jurisdiction at the same time.
What happens if divorce proceedings are started in both countries?
In many cases, the court where proceedings are issued first will continue, while the other court may be required to step back. This makes early legal advice critical before any application is made.
Are financial settlements the same in the UK and Australia?
No. While both systems aim for fairness, they take different approaches to needs, contributions, spousal maintenance and pensions or superannuation. Outcomes can differ significantly depending on which country deals with the case.
Do unmarried couples have the same rights in the UK and Australia?
No. England and Wales do not recognise “common law marriage”, and unmarried couples have limited financial rights. Australia, by contrast, allows many de facto couples to make claims similar to married couples.
Can mediation be done online if we live in different countries?
Yes. Mediation is often conducted online using video conferencing platforms such as Zoom. However, time differences and legal complexities mean it should be approached with careful planning and legal advice. Once agreement is reached both jurisdictions permit an application for Consent Orders.
Should I take legal advice before starting mediation or divorce proceedings?
Yes. Early advice can help you understand jurisdictional risks, preserve options and avoid steps that may have unintended legal consequences.
Speak to Eddison Cogan Lawyers
If you are separating or divorcing while living in the UK or Australia, early, coordinated advice can make a decisive difference.
Eddison Cogan Lawyers advises clients on cross-border family law matters involving England, Wales and Australia, offering practical guidance grounded in formal specialist study and experience.
Contact us to discuss your circumstances confidentially and explore your options.
