Key Court Family Law Decisions of Interest in 2025

The Family Law Act of 1975 is constantly shifting and evolving to meet the changing needs of Australian families over generations. With the legal landscape today being impacted by emerging technologies like AI, and evolving definitions of family violence in contemporary settings, the High Court has been prompted to make considerations over 2025 that have had little to no legal precedent.   

The decisions they make across Family Law cases that refer to new contexts can ultimately influence the outcome of future decisions – including across your own Family Law matters. This is why our legal team at Oxford Partners Lawyers advocates for staying up-to-date on all the developments within Australian Family Law.  

Thankfully, our team is here to outline top High Court Family Law decisions that have piqued the attention of Family Lawyers across Australia over the 2025 calendar year. Here are the top decisions made by the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia in 2025 that we estimate will have a lasting impact on the Family Law Act, and future Court proceedings for Family Law matters.

Major High Court decisions recorded from 2024-2025

Use of AI in Family Law documents – Mertz & Mertz (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC1A 222

In Mertz & Mertz (No 3), the FCFCOA saw that artificial intelligence was used in the preparation of the appellant's ‘Summary of Argument’ and ‘List of Authorities’. As a result, the authorities were reportedly incorrect, and the Court demanded clarity on the extent and nature of the use of AI, including what AI tools were specifically used to prepare the documents.  

As the use of AI in this instance resulted in the Court being provided with incorrect references, the Court made an order that the former solicitor for the appellant pay the respondent $10,000 as the costs of sunken time (i.e. time spent on correcting the AI errors). 

How this decision may impact your Family Law matters

The use of AI in Family Law is still a heavily contested issue, with some legal analysts recognising the value of artificial intelligence in streamlining document preparation and ultimately, reducing legal costs. However, in instances where AI-generated documentation records errors, the reduced consultation time and legal fees may be cancelled out by Court orders to cover costs associated with correcting mistakes in presented documents.  

In generating legal agreements, the use of AI can also enable AI biases that culminate in sexist or other discriminatory resolutions to Family Law matters, such as an ex-wife’s needs being favoured over an ex-husband’s in a child custody agreement.  

As there are no plans from AI developers to rectify these issues and support the technology being more suitable for legal applications, the FCFCOA will likely be responding poorly to the use of AI.

Financial non-disclosure in property settlements – Willis & Mulder [2025] FedCFamC1A 217

In this incredible case, a wife filed an appeal from final property settlement orders on the basis that the primary judge overlooked the husband’s potential financial non-disclosure. Post-trial evidence exposed gross dishonesty not only from the husband but from both parties, recognising that the total realistic value of some assets on both sides (incl. jewellery, musical instruments, two dissolved off-shore corporations, and Australian bank accounts), were not properly disclosed in the primary Court proceedings.  

The new evidence revealed extensive inconsistencies in the husband’s original financial disclosure documents, where the original documents established him as unemployed and on a pension. In actuality, the husband had recorded an annual taxable income of $176,000 and affirmed he was self-employed. This new evidence prompted the Court to schedule a rehearing and for costs ordered in a fixed sum.  

The judge ruling over this current appeal proceeding ruled that no error was made by the primary judge over the original property settlement order on the basis that had the post-trial evidence been made available to that judge, the original ruling would have been more balanced for both parties.

How this decision may impact your Family Law matters

Property framework amendments are among some of the Family Law changes as of June 2025, with the Family Law Amendment Act 2024 highlighting the duty of disclosure in financial or property matters from both parties and elevating the possible consequences of non-compliance with that duty.  

For future Family Law cases, parties who’ve demonstrated non-compliance with their duty of disclosure may experience more adverse consequences including punishment for contempt of Court, including costs orders and potential consideration of that non-compliance in determining Court rulings.

False allegations of sexual abuse – Joustra & Schuman [2025] FedCFamC2F 1478

In this case, a mother sought an appeal for a parenting agreement that had originally been instated in 2023, on the grounds that her child (b. 2019) had been a victim of sexual abuse at the hands of his father. After asserting that the child had notified her of the abuse in 2024, the mother cut off all contact with the father, thereby breaking the parenting agreement on the basis that she was concerned for the welfare and safety of her child.  

Law enforcement officials and medical professionals were brought into interview and evaluate the child for evidence of sexual abuse and no such evidence was found by the assessors. Despite this, the mother asserts they continued to believe the claims of their child, and exposed the child to repeated questioning by herself and third-party specialists, including the family’s therapist.  

The Court ascertained that the child had developed immense distress and confusion due to the continuing questioning, and called into question the mother’s conduct and whether the distress was resulting from the child’s exposure to a potentially false narrative.  

Court proceedings ended with the mother eventually conceding that her belief is the father did not sexually abuse his child, which prompted the judge to recognise it was in fact, the child’s mother and not the father that posed a risk to the child’s emotional and psychological safety. This prompted the establishment of a protective order, wherein which the father would have sole parental responsibility over the child, with an eight week moratorium on time with the mother which would give way to a gradual transition from supervised to unsupervised time, dependent on the mother’s continuing progress in therapy and compliance with the protective order.

How this decision may impact your Family Law matters

False allegations in custody disputes are treated with proportionate severity by the Family Court of Australia, and may even incur criminal penalties in cases where the allegations have adversely affected parties. Under the Family Law Act of 1975, legal repercussions for false allegations also includes provisions for the accusatory party being responsible for Family Law costs for the other party that were resulting from their having to respond to the falsified claims made against them.  

In this instance, the judge ruled that the mother was required to undergo psychiatric treatment herself before any chances of reconciliation with her child would be possible. With the fair yet still unfortunate outcome of this case in mind, we advise our clients at Oxford Partners Lawyers to consider the legal repercussions of false allegations before bringing any claims to Court.

Stay up-to-date with Family Law developments in our blog

The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia make their rulings based on what outcomes will best support the safety of the parties involved, and conserve the time and attention of the Court. In key cases such as the three we’ve outlined above, the final orders demonstrate areas for potential future amendments to the Family Law Act of 1975 to better support the efficiency of Court proceedings and ensure more swift, positive outcomes for parties involved.    

If you’d like to stay in the loop with legal news, then explore our wider blog here at Oxford Partners Lawyers, or check out our legal resources page to see where you can find more information on the Federal Circuit, the Family Court of Australia, and other Family Law entities and organisations.