---
title: "Family Law"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law"
type: "practice_area"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A16"
task_count: 37
last_reviewed: "2026-10-10"
---

# Family Law

> Keep client instructions, children's circumstances, financial records and personal safety at the centre of the work. The lawyer checks the evidence and decides what is released.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-10

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

Also covers: Matrimonial law, de facto property law, parenting/children's matters, divorce and separation law, domestic relations

## Key facts

- Tasks: 37
- Green: 4, Yellow: 24, Red: 9
- Levels: Green is AI drafts and the lawyer checks; Yellow is lawyer and AI draft together; Red is the lawyer writes and AI may only check, clarify or collect data.

## Principles

- **Start with safety and the actual court**: For FCFCOA work, check that the intended use protects the client, children and confidential information. Its AI practice direction differs from the NSW Supreme Court rules; use the requirements of the court hearing the matter.
- **Use AI for organised preparation**: Useful starting points are disclosure gap lists, financial change tables and source-linked document indexes. The lawyer obtains instructions, assesses safety and resolves the legal issues.
- **Keep evidence in the witness’s words**: An affidavit must reflect the witness’s own knowledge, experience or opinion. Do not let a generated narrative supply missing facts or replace the witness’s account.

## Checklist

- Open each relied-on authority independently. Confirm its existence, current status, proposition and any quotation or pinpoint reference.
- Trace every relied-on figure to its source, confirm dates and assumptions, and independently recalculate totals or derived amounts.
- Check the current court or regulator requirements, prescribed form and attachments for the intended document and filing.
- Review operative clauses in the complete document, including definitions, cross-references, schedules and inconsistencies with the instructions.
- Confirm that the actual tool, feature and processing terms permit use of this information, including access, retention, training and disclosure conditions.
- Check the specialist’s assumptions, qualifications and limits. Obtain the relevant expert or specialist review before relying on a technical conclusion.
- Confirm instructions and personal circumstances through appropriate direct engagement. Have the responsible lawyer assess safety, capacity or vulnerability concerns and escalation.
- Obtain and inspect the relevant current official register or search result. Confirm identities, interests and the date and scope of the search.
- Review the original source set for relevant material absent from the output, including contrary evidence, qualifications and unresolved gaps.
- Verify the applicable jurisdiction and the version of each relevant law, rule or instrument in force at the material time.
- Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.

## Restrictions

- Confirm firm, client and applicable court or professional restrictions before using any AI feature.

## Jurisdiction note

Apply this guidance to the actual matter and jurisdiction. Confirm current requirements before relying on an example.

## Basis

Suggested practical workflows informed by current primary and professional sources. Confirm each source’s jurisdiction and scope.

## Current requirements

Start with safety and the actual court. For FCFCOA work, check that the intended use protects the client, children and confidential information. Its AI practice direction differs from the NSW Supreme Court rules; use the requirements of the court hearing the matter.

## Current requirements

Use AI for organised preparation. Useful starting points are disclosure gap lists, financial change tables and source-linked document indexes. The lawyer obtains instructions, assesses safety and resolves the legal issues.

## Current requirements

Keep evidence in the witness’s words. An affidavit must reflect the witness’s own knowledge, experience or opinion. Do not let a generated narrative supply missing facts or replace the witness’s account.

Also covers: Matrimonial law, de facto property law, parenting/children's matters, divorce and separation law, domestic relations

Australian family law is jurisdictionally concentrated in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (FCFCOA) and the Family Court of Western Australia, governed by the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) as substantially amended in 2023, 2024, and 2025. The area carries the highest AI risk profile of any litigated practice: fact-patterns are intensely personal and non-recurring (defeating efficiency gains from narrow task decomposition); the courts handle children's welfare and significant asset redistribution; hallucinated citations have already produced regulatory referrals and loss of practising certificate status; and the confidentiality regime under Part XIVB of the FLA creates criminal exposure for unauthorised disclosure, meaning any data leak into a public LLM is a potential offence, not merely a disciplinary breach. As of 29 May 2026, the FCFCOA has issued a binding Practice Direction on AI use imposing verification, accountability, confidentiality, and expert-certification obligations on all court users.

## Limits on AI assistance

Red lines — never in this area

## Limits on AI assistance

AI must not draft or edit sworn affidavits, witness statements, or character references without line-by-line review and the deponent's personal confirmation of every factual assertion. In NSWSC proceedings, AI-generated content in these documents is expressly prohibited by Practice Note SC Gen 23 (effective 3 February 2025). The FCFCOA AI Practice Direction (29 May 2026) requires verification and accountability for all AI-generated content filed in court — practitioners must be able to explain their review process if questioned. AI must never be used to perform or substitute for the independent legal advice certification required for a Binding Financial Agreement under ss 90G or 90UJ FLA. This is a statutory precondition to validity; a certificate that does not accurately reflect a real advice session with the client voids the agreement. AI must not conduct or replace the lawyer's substantive family violence and risk screening conversation with the client. Economic and financial abuse is now expressly defined as family violence under s 4AB FLA (June 2025 amendments) and must be identified by a human practitioner in a direct conversation — AI intake tools trained before June 2025 will systematically miss this category. Safety planning, coercive control assessment, and DFV referrals require a human practitioner. AI-generated case citations must never be filed in any court document without human verification against AustLII, Jade, or an official law report. Dayal [2024] FedCFamC2F 1166 resulted in regulatory referral and removal of principal entitlement; Mertz & Mertz (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC1A 222 resulted in costs orders of over $46,000 and regulatory referrals for a solicitor and two barristers. Both are binding disciplinary precedents. Confidential client information — including asset schedules, parenting allegations, violence histories, health and mental health information — must not be entered into any public or consumer AI tool (ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude.ai consumer tier, or equivalent) or any tool whose data-retention and training terms have not been confirmed as enterprise-grade. Entering such data risks breach of ASCR Rule 9, APPs 6 and 11, Part XIVB FLA (criminal offence for unauthorised publication of identifiable proceedings material), and the codified disclosure obligations under ss 71B/90RI FLA. AI must not be relied upon to apply the June 2025 property codification, the economic-abuse contribution factor, the 1 April 2025 superannuation regulations, the June 2025 codified disclosure obligations (ss 71B/90RI), or the 6 May 2024 parenting amendments without human verification that the specific tool's training data incorporates these changes. Tools trained before the relevant amendment date will silently apply superseded law. AI must not independently assess a child's best interests, recommend parenting arrangements, or evaluate family violence risk for purposes of advising a client — these require professional judgment informed by the full factual matrix, including culture, developmental stage, and violence history, not pattern-matching to similar cases. AI must not autonomously prepare or populate Form 13 Financial Statements or any statutory disclosure instrument. From 10 June 2025, non-compliance with the codified duty of disclosure in ss 71B/90RI FLA carries criminal penalties including fines and imprisonment for serious breaches. An AI-extracted financial schedule that omits assets is not merely a factual error — it is a potential criminal non-compliance. AI output must not be sent to a client, opposing party, or the court before a lawyer has read and approved the final document. No automated-send workflows are permissible in family law matters. The FCFCOA AI Practice Direction (29 May 2026) places the accountability obligation personally on the practitioner.

- AI must not draft or edit sworn affidavits, witness statements, or character references without line-by-line review and the deponent's personal confirmation of every factual assertion. In NSWSC proceedings, AI-generated content in these documents is expressly prohibited by Practice Note SC Gen 23 (effective 3 February 2025). The FCFCOA AI Practice Direction (29 May 2026) requires verification and accountability for all AI-generated content filed in court — practitioners must be able to explain their review process if questioned.
- AI must never be used to perform or substitute for the independent legal advice certification required for a Binding Financial Agreement under ss 90G or 90UJ FLA. This is a statutory precondition to validity; a certificate that does not accurately reflect a real advice session with the client voids the agreement.
- AI must not conduct or replace the lawyer's substantive family violence and risk screening conversation with the client. Economic and financial abuse is now expressly defined as family violence under s 4AB FLA (June 2025 amendments) and must be identified by a human practitioner in a direct conversation — AI intake tools trained before June 2025 will systematically miss this category. Safety planning, coercive control assessment, and DFV referrals require a human practitioner.
- AI-generated case citations must never be filed in any court document without human verification against AustLII, Jade, or an official law report. Dayal [2024] FedCFamC2F 1166 resulted in regulatory referral and removal of principal entitlement; Mertz & Mertz (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC1A 222 resulted in costs orders of over $46,000 and regulatory referrals for a solicitor and two barristers. Both are binding disciplinary precedents.
- Confidential client information — including asset schedules, parenting allegations, violence histories, health and mental health information — must not be entered into any public or consumer AI tool (ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude.ai consumer tier, or equivalent) or any tool whose data-retention and training terms have not been confirmed as enterprise-grade. Entering such data risks breach of ASCR Rule 9, APPs 6 and 11, Part XIVB FLA (criminal offence for unauthorised publication of identifiable proceedings material), and the codified disclosure obligations under ss 71B/90RI FLA.
- AI must not be relied upon to apply the June 2025 property codification, the economic-abuse contribution factor, the 1 April 2025 superannuation regulations, the June 2025 codified disclosure obligations (ss 71B/90RI), or the 6 May 2024 parenting amendments without human verification that the specific tool's training data incorporates these changes. Tools trained before the relevant amendment date will silently apply superseded law.
- AI must not independently assess a child's best interests, recommend parenting arrangements, or evaluate family violence risk for purposes of advising a client — these require professional judgment informed by the full factual matrix, including culture, developmental stage, and violence history, not pattern-matching to similar cases.
- AI must not autonomously prepare or populate Form 13 Financial Statements or any statutory disclosure instrument. From 10 June 2025, non-compliance with the codified duty of disclosure in ss 71B/90RI FLA carries criminal penalties including fines and imprisonment for serious breaches. An AI-extracted financial schedule that omits assets is not merely a factual error — it is a potential criminal non-compliance.
- AI output must not be sent to a client, opposing party, or the court before a lawyer has read and approved the final document. No automated-send workflows are permissible in family law matters. The FCFCOA AI Practice Direction (29 May 2026) places the accountability obligation personally on the practitioner.

## Jurisdiction-specific considerations

Australian traps

## Jurisdiction-specific considerations

FCFCOA Practice Direction — Use of Artificial Intelligence (issued 29 May 2026): binding on all court users including parties, lawyers, private experts, and others involved in proceedings. Obligations: verify and proofread all AI-generated content; reference only existing and accurate legislation and case law; do not enter sensitive or confidential information into publicly available AI tools; understand how the AI system stores and uses data; disclose what tool was used and how output was reviewed if questioned by the court; provide private experts with a copy of the direction and obtain their certification that they have reviewed it. Consequences for non-compliance: court may disregard the affected material, issue costs orders, or refer the matter to the relevant regulatory body. Dayal [2024] FedCFamC2F 1166 / VLSB+C outcome (19 August 2025): Victorian solicitor filed AI-hallucinated citations (prepared in Handa v Mallik proceedings) without verification; referred to the Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner; practising certificate varied to remove entitlement to practise as a principal, with supervised practice and quarterly reporting requirements. Controlling Australian disciplinary precedent for AI misuse in family law litigation. Mertz & Mertz (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC1A 222 (Full Court — Aldridge, Carew and Behrens JJ): AI used to generate Summary of Argument and List of Authorities with incorrect case references filed on appeal; costs order of $36,955 in favour of the respondent; further $10,000 in costs thrown away ordered against the former solicitor; solicitor and two barristers referred to relevant professional bodies. Court stated AI use 'does not absolve the author from any of their professional or ethical obligations.' Verification duty extends to all documents and submissions, not just citations. NSW Supreme Court Practice Note SC Gen 23 (effective 3 February 2025): expressly prohibits AI-generated content in affidavits, witness statements, and character references; requires an explicit declaration that AI was not used to generate the content. Applies in NSWSC proceedings; should be treated as best-practice benchmark for FCFCOA and other Australian courts pending equivalent directions from those courts. Part XIVB Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (formerly s 121): criminal offence to publish or broadcast an account of family law proceedings that identifies parties or witnesses without court authorisation. Entering client matter detail into a public AI tool that logs, stores, or trains on inputs could constitute publication. Criminal exposure, not merely disciplinary. Family Law Amendment Act 2024 — property provisions effective 10 June 2025: codifies the four-step property adjustment framework in ss 79 and 90SM; introduces explicit economic-abuse contribution factor (the court must consider the economic impact of family violence on contributions and future circumstances); changes treatment of post-separation contributions. AI tools trained before June 2025 apply the pre-codification judge-made framework and will not generate the economic-abuse analysis now required by statute. Codified duty of disclosure effective 10 June 2025 (ss 71B and 90RI FLA): elevates disclosure obligations from court rules into the Act; duty is continuous from commencement of negotiations to final resolution; court may reduce the non-disclosing party's property entitlement, issue costs orders, or impose criminal penalties (fines or imprisonment) for serious breaches. AI-extracted asset schedules that miss assets or liabilities are potential non-compliance with criminal penalty exposure, not merely factual errors. Family Law (Superannuation) Regulations 2025 and companion Family Law (Superannuation) (Methods and Factors for Valuing Particular Superannuation Interests) Approval 2025 (both effective 1 April 2025): replace the 2001 Regulations with updated actuarial factors and valuation methodology for defined-benefit and pension-phase interests. Materially different outcomes from prior methodology (approximately 4% higher valuation for CPI-indexed lifetime pension for 65-year-old male). AI tools trained before April 2025 apply superseded methodology silently. Family Law Amendment Act 2023 — s 60CC parenting reforms (effective 6 May 2024): removed presumption of equal shared parental responsibility; condensed best-interests factors from 12 to 6; elevated safety. AI trained before mid-2024 will apply the superseded framework — this is a direct source of wrong client advice. Western Australia — dual-jurisdiction complexity: the Family Court of Western Australia administers state-registered de facto and parenting matters under the Family Court Act 1997 (WA) alongside the FLA. The Supreme Court of Western Australia has issued separate AI guidelines (consultation completed April 2025; direction issued). WA-specific practice directions may differ from FCFCOA directions; practitioners must confirm which set of requirements applies to the specific matter. The WA Legal Practice Board's position on AI (December 2024 Joint Statement) must also be applied. Harman undertaking: documents produced under subpoena or compulsory disclosure in family law proceedings are subject to the implied undertaking not to use them for collateral purposes. Feeding subpoenaed documents into an AI analysis tool may breach this undertaking — particularly relevant where AI is used for document-intensive asset-tracing work. Legal professional privilege: uploading privileged communications to AI tools operating on open or unclear data-retention models creates a live privilege-waiver risk. Australian courts have not yet ruled definitively but the risk is treated as real by major bar associations and the FCFCOA AI Practice Direction (29 May 2026) specifically requires practitioners to understand how AI systems store and use data before use. December 2024 Joint Statement (NSW Law Society, VLSB+C, WA Legal Practice Board): confirms ASCR confidentiality obligations apply to AI tool use; practitioners must not use tools that retain or train on input data unless enterprise privacy safeguards are contractually confirmed.

- FCFCOA Practice Direction — Use of Artificial Intelligence (issued 29 May 2026): binding on all court users including parties, lawyers, private experts, and others involved in proceedings. Obligations: verify and proofread all AI-generated content; reference only existing and accurate legislation and case law; do not enter sensitive or confidential information into publicly available AI tools; understand how the AI system stores and uses data; disclose what tool was used and how output was reviewed if questioned by the court; provide private experts with a copy of the direction and obtain their certification that they have reviewed it. Consequences for non-compliance: court may disregard the affected material, issue costs orders, or refer the matter to the relevant regulatory body.
- Dayal [2024] FedCFamC2F 1166 / VLSB+C outcome (19 August 2025): Victorian solicitor filed AI-hallucinated citations (prepared in Handa v Mallik proceedings) without verification; referred to the Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner; practising certificate varied to remove entitlement to practise as a principal, with supervised practice and quarterly reporting requirements. Controlling Australian disciplinary precedent for AI misuse in family law litigation.
- Mertz & Mertz (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC1A 222 (Full Court — Aldridge, Carew and Behrens JJ): AI used to generate Summary of Argument and List of Authorities with incorrect case references filed on appeal; costs order of $36,955 in favour of the respondent; further $10,000 in costs thrown away ordered against the former solicitor; solicitor and two barristers referred to relevant professional bodies. Court stated AI use 'does not absolve the author from any of their professional or ethical obligations.' Verification duty extends to all documents and submissions, not just citations.
- NSW Supreme Court Practice Note SC Gen 23 (effective 3 February 2025): expressly prohibits AI-generated content in affidavits, witness statements, and character references; requires an explicit declaration that AI was not used to generate the content. Applies in NSWSC proceedings; should be treated as best-practice benchmark for FCFCOA and other Australian courts pending equivalent directions from those courts.
- Part XIVB Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (formerly s 121): criminal offence to publish or broadcast an account of family law proceedings that identifies parties or witnesses without court authorisation. Entering client matter detail into a public AI tool that logs, stores, or trains on inputs could constitute publication. Criminal exposure, not merely disciplinary.
- Family Law Amendment Act 2024 — property provisions effective 10 June 2025: codifies the four-step property adjustment framework in ss 79 and 90SM; introduces explicit economic-abuse contribution factor (the court must consider the economic impact of family violence on contributions and future circumstances); changes treatment of post-separation contributions. AI tools trained before June 2025 apply the pre-codification judge-made framework and will not generate the economic-abuse analysis now required by statute.
- Codified duty of disclosure effective 10 June 2025 (ss 71B and 90RI FLA): elevates disclosure obligations from court rules into the Act; duty is continuous from commencement of negotiations to final resolution; court may reduce the non-disclosing party's property entitlement, issue costs orders, or impose criminal penalties (fines or imprisonment) for serious breaches. AI-extracted asset schedules that miss assets or liabilities are potential non-compliance with criminal penalty exposure, not merely factual errors.
- Family Law (Superannuation) Regulations 2025 and companion Family Law (Superannuation) (Methods and Factors for Valuing Particular Superannuation Interests) Approval 2025 (both effective 1 April 2025): replace the 2001 Regulations with updated actuarial factors and valuation methodology for defined-benefit and pension-phase interests. Materially different outcomes from prior methodology (approximately 4% higher valuation for CPI-indexed lifetime pension for 65-year-old male). AI tools trained before April 2025 apply superseded methodology silently.
- Family Law Amendment Act 2023 — s 60CC parenting reforms (effective 6 May 2024): removed presumption of equal shared parental responsibility; condensed best-interests factors from 12 to 6; elevated safety. AI trained before mid-2024 will apply the superseded framework — this is a direct source of wrong client advice.
- Western Australia — dual-jurisdiction complexity: the Family Court of Western Australia administers state-registered de facto and parenting matters under the Family Court Act 1997 (WA) alongside the FLA. The Supreme Court of Western Australia has issued separate AI guidelines (consultation completed April 2025; direction issued). WA-specific practice directions may differ from FCFCOA directions; practitioners must confirm which set of requirements applies to the specific matter. The WA Legal Practice Board's position on AI (December 2024 Joint Statement) must also be applied.
- Harman undertaking: documents produced under subpoena or compulsory disclosure in family law proceedings are subject to the implied undertaking not to use them for collateral purposes. Feeding subpoenaed documents into an AI analysis tool may breach this undertaking — particularly relevant where AI is used for document-intensive asset-tracing work.
- Legal professional privilege: uploading privileged communications to AI tools operating on open or unclear data-retention models creates a live privilege-waiver risk. Australian courts have not yet ruled definitively but the risk is treated as real by major bar associations and the FCFCOA AI Practice Direction (29 May 2026) specifically requires practitioners to understand how AI systems store and use data before use.
- December 2024 Joint Statement (NSW Law Society, VLSB+C, WA Legal Practice Board): confirms ASCR confidentiality obligations apply to AI tool use; practitioners must not use tools that retain or train on input data unless enterprise privacy safeguards are contractually confirmed.

## Risks to address

How it goes wrong

## Risks to address

Hallucinated family law citations filed in FCFCOA: the specific, documented failure mode from Dayal [2024] FedCFamC2F 1166 (loss of principal status) and Mertz & Mertz (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC1A 222 (costs orders exceeding $46,000, regulatory referrals for solicitor and two barristers). A Melbourne lawyer in 2025 had a hearing adjourned because AI-generated citations did not exist; a WA lawyer in August 2025 submitted four non-existent cases. These are recurring, not isolated, incidents. Application of superseded parenting law: AI tools trained before May 2024 silently apply the pre-amendment s 60CC framework (12 factors, presumption of equal shared parental responsibility), advising clients on a legal test that no longer exists and producing incorrect assessments of parenting arrangements. Application of superseded property law: AI tools trained before June 2025 apply the pre-codification property framework and miss the economic-abuse contribution factor now required by s 79/90SM; property advice or consent orders may fail to capture entitlements the client has under the amended Act, or miss the statutory four-step sequence. Disclosure non-compliance via AI-extracted asset schedule: AI populates a Form 13 Financial Statement or negotiation schedule that omits a trust interest, SMSF, or business holding the AI could not identify from the documents provided; from 10 June 2025, this is a breach of the codified duty of disclosure (ss 71B/90RI FLA) carrying criminal penalty exposure, not merely a court-rules procedural error. Superannuation splitting valuation error: AI applies superseded 2001 Regulation actuarial factors rather than the 1 April 2025 Regulation and companion Approval 2025 factors, producing materially wrong valuations for defined-benefit or pension-phase interests and leading to undersettlement of the non-member spouse's entitlement. Confidentiality breach via public LLM: lawyer or paralegal enters client's violence history, asset schedule, or children's details into a public AI tool; the tool logs the input; potential breach of ASCR Rule 9, APPs 6 and 11, and Part XIVB FLA (criminal exposure for publishing identifiable proceedings material).

- Hallucinated family law citations filed in FCFCOA: the specific, documented failure mode from Dayal [2024] FedCFamC2F 1166 (loss of principal status) and Mertz & Mertz (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC1A 222 (costs orders exceeding $46,000, regulatory referrals for solicitor and two barristers). A Melbourne lawyer in 2025 had a hearing adjourned because AI-generated citations did not exist; a WA lawyer in August 2025 submitted four non-existent cases. These are recurring, not isolated, incidents.
- Application of superseded parenting law: AI tools trained before May 2024 silently apply the pre-amendment s 60CC framework (12 factors, presumption of equal shared parental responsibility), advising clients on a legal test that no longer exists and producing incorrect assessments of parenting arrangements.
- Application of superseded property law: AI tools trained before June 2025 apply the pre-codification property framework and miss the economic-abuse contribution factor now required by s 79/90SM; property advice or consent orders may fail to capture entitlements the client has under the amended Act, or miss the statutory four-step sequence.
- Disclosure non-compliance via AI-extracted asset schedule: AI populates a Form 13 Financial Statement or negotiation schedule that omits a trust interest, SMSF, or business holding the AI could not identify from the documents provided; from 10 June 2025, this is a breach of the codified duty of disclosure (ss 71B/90RI FLA) carrying criminal penalty exposure, not merely a court-rules procedural error.
- Superannuation splitting valuation error: AI applies superseded 2001 Regulation actuarial factors rather than the 1 April 2025 Regulation and companion Approval 2025 factors, producing materially wrong valuations for defined-benefit or pension-phase interests and leading to undersettlement of the non-member spouse's entitlement.
- Confidentiality breach via public LLM: lawyer or paralegal enters client's violence history, asset schedule, or children's details into a public AI tool; the tool logs the input; potential breach of ASCR Rule 9, APPs 6 and 11, and Part XIVB FLA (criminal exposure for publishing identifiable proceedings material).

## Review checklist

The lawyer's review checklist

## Review checklist

Every legal authority (case name, citation, and proposition) has been independently verified against AustLII or Jade — no citation is filed without human confirmation that the case exists at the cited reference, says what is attributed, and has not been overruled or distinguished. Every statutory provision cited reflects the current version of the Family Law Act 1975 including: s 60CC parenting amendments effective 6 May 2024; ss 79/90SM property codification and economic-abuse contribution factor effective 10 June 2025; codified disclosure duty in ss 71B/90RI effective 10 June 2025; and Family Law (Superannuation) Regulations 2025 and companion Approval 2025 effective 1 April 2025. No client-identifying or matter-specific information was entered into a public or consumer AI tool. If an enterprise tool was used, the data-processing agreement confirming enterprise-grade retention terms has been confirmed and documented before any matter data was entered. All financial figures in any property schedule, Form 13 Financial Statement, or superannuation splitting document have been verified against primary source documents (tax returns, bank statements, superannuation member statements, title searches, ASIC/PPSR searches) — not accepted from AI extraction alone. All asset classes have been confirmed present including discretionary trusts, SMSFs, cryptocurrency, and business interests. Any parenting arrangement or best-interests analysis reflects the six current s 60CC factors (not the pre-May 2024 twelve-factor framework), has been reviewed for family violence and safety obligations specific to this client's history, and has been reviewed against any current family violence orders, child protection orders, or FVIOs from any jurisdiction. The document does not contain any AI-generated narrative about family violence, child abuse, economic abuse, mental health, or health history that has not been confirmed word-by-word with the client — AI interpolation of 'typical' trauma narrative is a documented failure mode that destroys credibility at cross-examination. The document complies with FCFCOA AI Practice Direction (29 May 2026): accurate existing authorities only; no misleading content; the practitioner can explain what AI tool was used and the review process if questioned; any private expert engaged has been provided with the Practice Direction and has certified receipt. Any BFA advice letter or certification reflects a substantive oral advice session personally conducted by the supervising solicitor with the client — AI-drafted advice letters do not satisfy the independent legal advice requirement under ss 90G/90UJ FLA and expose the firm to negligence and agreement-invalidity risk.

- Every legal authority (case name, citation, and proposition) has been independently verified against AustLII or Jade — no citation is filed without human confirmation that the case exists at the cited reference, says what is attributed, and has not been overruled or distinguished.
- Every statutory provision cited reflects the current version of the Family Law Act 1975 including: s 60CC parenting amendments effective 6 May 2024; ss 79/90SM property codification and economic-abuse contribution factor effective 10 June 2025; codified disclosure duty in ss 71B/90RI effective 10 June 2025; and Family Law (Superannuation) Regulations 2025 and companion Approval 2025 effective 1 April 2025.
- No client-identifying or matter-specific information was entered into a public or consumer AI tool. If an enterprise tool was used, the data-processing agreement confirming enterprise-grade retention terms has been confirmed and documented before any matter data was entered.
- All financial figures in any property schedule, Form 13 Financial Statement, or superannuation splitting document have been verified against primary source documents (tax returns, bank statements, superannuation member statements, title searches, ASIC/PPSR searches) — not accepted from AI extraction alone. All asset classes have been confirmed present including discretionary trusts, SMSFs, cryptocurrency, and business interests.
- Any parenting arrangement or best-interests analysis reflects the six current s 60CC factors (not the pre-May 2024 twelve-factor framework), has been reviewed for family violence and safety obligations specific to this client's history, and has been reviewed against any current family violence orders, child protection orders, or FVIOs from any jurisdiction.
- The document does not contain any AI-generated narrative about family violence, child abuse, economic abuse, mental health, or health history that has not been confirmed word-by-word with the client — AI interpolation of 'typical' trauma narrative is a documented failure mode that destroys credibility at cross-examination.
- The document complies with FCFCOA AI Practice Direction (29 May 2026): accurate existing authorities only; no misleading content; the practitioner can explain what AI tool was used and the review process if questioned; any private expert engaged has been provided with the Practice Direction and has certified receipt.
- Any BFA advice letter or certification reflects a substantive oral advice session personally conducted by the supervising solicitor with the client — AI-drafted advice letters do not satisfy the independent legal advice requirement under ss 90G/90UJ FLA and expose the firm to negligence and agreement-invalidity risk.

## Tasks (37)

| Task | Level | How AI is used | What the lawyer must review |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| [Find missing financial disclosure documents](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/find-missing-financial-disclosure-documents.md) | Yellow | Compare a lawyer-approved disclosure request with a permitted document inventory and draft a received, missing and follow-up table. | Check the inventory against the actual files Discuss gaps with the client before sending a request |
| [Check permission before using subpoenaed or sensitive records](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/check-permission-before-using-subpoenaed-or-sensitive-records.md) | Red | Organise a restricted record inventory from metadata already permitted for use. Do not upload the underlying records until the lawyer clears access and… | Decide access, copying and permitted purpose Decide any need to protect sensitive information |
| [Turn existing parenting orders into a practical arrangements sheet](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/turn-existing-parenting-orders-into-a-practical-arrangements-sheet.md) | Yellow | Extract obligations from the complete current orders into a draft table of dates, handovers, communication and travel arrangements. | Check every entry Resolve ambiguity or conflict before the sheet goes to the client |
| [Identify financial changes that need a disclosure update](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/identify-financial-changes-that-need-a-disclosure-update.md) | Yellow | Compare a prior financial schedule with new verified statements and draft a change table. | Decide the disclosure consequences Check any amended statement or affidavit against current requirements |
| Draft the minute of consent orders from the settled terms | Yellow | Working with the lawyer on terms the lawyer has settled, build the minute clause by clause from those terms and the disclosure figures the lawyer has checked,… | Read every clause against the settled terms — a model drafting from precedent will reproduce superseded property language.… |
| [Draft an affidavit or witness statement from the proofing note](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/draft-an-affidavit-or-witness-statement-from-the-proofing-note.md) | Red | Index the annexures against the lawyer's draft affidavit, list every assertion in that draft with no support in the proofing note or the permitted documents,… | The lawyer writes the affidavit in the deponent's own words from the proofing note, and the deponent must read and adopt it before it is sworn.… |
| [Draft the financial agreement from the settled terms](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/draft-the-financial-agreement-from-the-settled-terms.md) | Red | Compare the agreement the lawyer has drafted against the settled terms and the disclosure the lawyer has verified.… | Read every clause yourself before the agreement is signed; the tool has written none of it and must not be asked to.… |
| [Prepare the financial statement and the disclosure index](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/prepare-the-financial-statement-and-the-disclosure-index.md) | Red | The Financial Statement carries a sworn affidavit, so the tool writes no part of it and enters nothing in the form.… | The lawyer completes the form on the client's instructions and the client swears or affirms it.… |
| Build the property-pool balance sheet from disclosed documents | Yellow | From bank statements, titles, superannuation/retirement and entity records, draft an asset-and-liability table with values, ownership and source documents,… | Decide values and ownership yourself Do not treat a generated balance sheet as the pool |
| [Prepare the retirement-benefit or superannuation-splitting steps list](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/prepare-the-retirement-benefit-or-superannuation-splitting-steps-list.md) | Red | From the member statements and instructions, list fund type, splitting steps, forms and valuation information still required.… | Check the current splitting methodology and forms; they change Obtain trustee information or an actuary's certificate Do not rely on a generated valuation |
| [Draft a parenting plan or parenting orders from the arrangements sheet](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/draft-a-parenting-plan-or-parenting-orders-from-the-arrangements-sheet.md) | Yellow | Turn the client's proposed arrangements into a first-draft plan or minute of order covering live-with, time, holidays, communication and decision-making. | Apply the child's best interests, which govern Check workability Check family-violence risks are not papered over |
| Prepare an international-relocation issues pack | Red | Organise the proposed move, the existing parenting orders and the documents on the file into a table of the best-interests considerations, quoting beside each… | Relocation is high-stakes. Verify the Convention answers yourself — accession by the destination is not enough;… |
| Draft urgent freezing, recovery or injunction papers from the facts brief | Red | The affidavit is barred to the tool: the lawyer drafts it, and the application and proposed orders as well.… | The lawyer drafts the affidavit, the application and the orders, and the deponent must adopt the evidence.… |
| Draft the expert brief and review a valuation or family-report draft | Yellow | Draft instructions from the issues list and table the draft report's assumptions, interviews and recommendations with page cites. | Remember the expert's duty is to the court; do not coach Check whether the report may be loaded into a tool |
| Screen the file for family-violence risk and safe-disclosure issues | Red | From permitted intake notes, list risk indicators, existing orders and documents that must not be served or uploaded, for the lawyer's screening. | Assess the risk yourself Never put safety-location information into a tool |
| [Prepare child-support and maintenance calculation inputs from the file](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/prepare-child-support-and-maintenance-calculation-inputs-from-the-file.md) | Yellow | From disclosed incomes, care and special-needs costs, prepare inputs and list missing tax-year or care-percentage facts.… | Leave administrative child support to the agency Base maintenance on a means-and-needs analysis of verified figures Treat generated estimates as illustrative… |
| Draft submissions, an argument summary and a chronology for the hearing | Yellow | From the affidavits and the issues list, draft a chronology, a case outline and proposed orders with record cites. | Verify every cite Do not file AI-proposed authorities you have not read |
| Summarise permitted transcripts and conference records into a working note | Yellow | From transcripts and conference notes the lawyer has cleared, produce a dated working summary with page cites and a list of undertakings or orders made. | Check against the transcript, which governs Do not load restricted family-court material into a tool |
| Draft a mediation or family-dispute-resolution position paper from the disclosure file | Yellow | From the balance sheet, parenting arrangements and instructions, draft a confidential position paper and an open-issues list. | Take offers from client instructions Check the paper does not annex restricted material |
| Trace funds through disclosed bank statements into a source-and-application table | Yellow | From permitted statements, table large deposits and withdrawals with dates, counterparties and unmatched items for the lawyer. | Decide dissipation and add-back arguments yourself Do not treat unmatched items as hidden assets |
| [Check an FCFCOA filing against PD-AI](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/check-an-fcfcoa-filing-against-pd-ai.md) | Yellow | Run a checklist on accuracy, currency of authorities and whether any embedded "smart" tool was used. | Verify authorities and confirm no litigation-abuse use (para 4.20). |
| [Analyse financial disclosure for dissipation and missing documents](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/analyse-financial-disclosure-for-dissipation-and-missing-documents.md) | Yellow | Flag income patterns and missing records across bank and super statements. | Lawyer verifies each flag against the documents. |
| [Comply with FCFCOA PD-AI when preparing documents](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/comply-with-fcfcoa-pd-ai-when-preparing-documents.md) | Yellow | Check documents for AI accountability requirements. | Court users must account for AI use. |
| [Advise a client on using AI for their own affidavit](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/advise-a-client-on-using-ai-for-their-own-affidavit.md) | Green | Explain affidavit must be in own words. | Follow Legal Aid NSW guidance. |
| [Locate information within a large family file](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/locate-information-within-a-large-family-file.md) | Green | Search and summarise file for specific facts. | Lawyer verifies facts. |
| [Check AI case summaries before citing family law principles](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/check-ai-case-summaries-before-citing-family-law-principles.md) | Red | Verify AI summaries of key cases. | QLS warns AI misstated Baumgartner. |
| Comply with FCFCOA AI practice direction in family documents | Green | Check affidavits for prohibited AI use and disclosures. | Lawyer confirms. |
| Advise a client on risks of using ChatGPT for family law documents | Green | Draft a client warning. | Lawyer approves. |
| Summarise financial disclosure documents into an asset pool table | Yellow | Extract assets and liabilities. | Verify against the documents. |
| Prepare the Family Court of Western Australia Affidavit - General from the proofing note | Yellow | Turn the proofing note into a first draft of the Affidavit - General on the Court's form. | The deponent reads every sentence and removes anything they did not say. |
| Prepare the Family Court of Western Australia Affidavit for eFiling Divorce | Yellow | Draft the eFiling divorce affidavit from the marriage certificate and the client's instructions. | Check every date and name against the marriage certificate and the instructions. |
| Complete Family Court of Western Australia fee exemption form NP14 from the client's financial documents | Yellow | Place the client's income and assets onto form NP14. | Match every figure to a source document. Leave blank anything the client has not supplied. |
| Complete Family Court of Western Australia fee reduction form NP8 for a divorce or nullity | Yellow | Place the client's details onto form NP8. | Check the form number, the fee type and every figure against the client's documents. |
| Work through the Family Court of Western Australia Financial Statement kit before the financial statement is filed | Yellow | List the steps and questions in the Court's Financial Statement kit. | Open the Court's kit and delete any step the kit does not contain. |
| List the questions in the Family Court of Western Australia Superannuation Information Kit | Yellow | List the superannuation questions in the Court's kit for the property matter. | Check the list against the kit. Do not add a fund detail the kit and the client did not supply. |
| Read the Family Court of Western Australia Chapter 19 Costs Notice brochure before giving a costs figure | Yellow | Do not fill figures into the brochure. List the costs entries on the file that a person still has to check. | The forms list publishes a brochure, not a form for the file's costs figures. Do not treat a generated figure as the notice. |
| [Check the Family Court of Western Australia page before assuming an AI practice direction](https://ailawframework.com/practice/family-law/check-the-family-court-of-western-australia-page-before-assuming-an-ai-p.md) | Yellow | Record what the Court homepage and its news list actually say about AI. | The homepage fetched on 10 October 2026 does not state an AI practice direction. Do not treat another court's practice direction as applying in this Court… |

## Jurisdiction notes

### Australia

#### Courts and Act

Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (FCFCOA) and Family Court of Western Australia, under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) as substantially amended in 2023, 2024 and 2025.

#### Confidentiality

Part XIVB of the FLA makes unauthorised disclosure a criminal offence. Putting case material into a public AI tool can be an offence, not only a disciplinary breach.

#### Court AI rules

The FCFCOA Practice Direction on AI (29 May 2026) binds all court users: verification, accountability, confidentiality and expert certification.

#### Citations

Fabricated citations have already led to regulatory referrals and loss of practising certificate status.

- Affidavits, statements and references: line-by-line review; the deponent confirms every fact. NSWSC prohibits AI content (SC Gen 23, from 3 February 2025).
- Verify every citation on AustLII, Jade or an official report. Dayal [2024] FedCFamC2F 1166 (referral); Mertz & Mertz (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC1A 222 (costs over $46,000, referrals).
- Lawyer approves all output before it reaches a client, other party or court; no automated sending. The FCFCOA AI Practice Direction holds the practitioner accountable.

Sources:

- [FCFCOA: Duty of disclosure](https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/fl/pubs/duty-disclosure) (checked 2026-09-16)
- [Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia — AI practice direction](https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/pd/pd-ai) (checked 2026-09-16)
- [FCFCOA: Family law subpoenas](https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/fl/subpoenas) (checked 2026-09-16)
- [FCFCOA: Protecting sensitive information in family law proceedings](https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/fl/protected-confidences) (checked 2026-09-16)
- [FCFCOA: Financial proceedings practice direction](https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/fl/pd/fam-financial) (checked 2026-09-16)

### New Zealand

Local name: Family law (Family Court of New Zealand)

#### Court and rules

Family Court under the Family Court Rules 2002. No Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) and no Federal Circuit and Family Court.

#### Key statutes

Care of Children Act 2004, Property (Relationships) Act 1976, Family Violence Act 2018, Family Proceedings Act 1980, Oranga Tamariki Act 1989 and others on the Ministry of Justice list.

#### Terms that differ

'Care of children', not 'parental responsibility'. Relationship property under the PRA, not a s 79 pool. No binding financial agreements.

#### AI guidelines

The Family Court is listed in the Courts of New Zealand GenAI guidelines.

- Do not enter private, confidential, suppressed or privileged material into a public chatbot.
- Do not put a child's location, a protected address or a Family Court document that is not public into a public chatbot.

Sources:

- [Ministry of Justice: Family Court legislation and rules](https://www.justice.govt.nz/family/family-court/about-the-family-court/family-court-legislation-and-rules/) (checked 2026-09-23)
- [Care of Children Act 2004](https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2004/0090/latest/DLM317233.html) (checked 2026-09-23)
- [Property (Relationships) Act 1976](https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1976/166/en/latest/) (checked 2026-09-23)
- [Courts of New Zealand: GenAI guidelines — Lawyers (7 December 2023)](https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/assets/6-Going-to-Court/practice-directions/practice-guidelines/all-benches/20231207-GenAI-Guidelines-Lawyers.pdf) (checked 2026-09-23)
- [NZLS: Generative AI guidance for lawyers (March 2024)](https://www.lawsociety.org.nz/professional-practice/rules-and-maintaining-professional-standards/generative-ai-guidance-for-lawyers/) (checked 2026-09-23)

### United States

Local name: Family law

#### State law

State law governs this work. Check the statutes, court rules and conduct rules of the state where the matter is. Do not import an Australian statute, form or court AI practice note.

#### Courts

No national Family Court. Parenting, property and support are state codes and courts, with limited federal overlays such as interstate support.

#### Evidence

California's Practical Guidance and Formal Opinion 512: affidavits stay in the witness's words.

- Do not upload family-court affidavits, medical records or location information to a public generative tool.

Sources:

- [ABA Formal Opinion 512, Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools (29 July 2024)](https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/ethics-opinions/aba-formal-opinion-512.pdf) (checked 2026-09-23)
- [State Bar of California, Practical Guidance for the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in the Practice of Law (2026)](https://www.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/0/documents/ethics/Generative-AI-Practical-Guidance.pdf) (checked 2026-09-23)
- [ABA Model Rule 1.6, Confidentiality of Information](https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_6_confidentiality_of_information/) (checked 2026-09-23)

## Sources

- [FCFCOA: Duty of disclosure](https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/fl/pubs/duty-disclosure) (checked 2026-09-16)
- [Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia — AI practice direction](https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/pd/pd-ai) (checked 2026-09-16)
- [FCFCOA: Family law subpoenas](https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/fl/subpoenas) (checked 2026-09-16)
- [FCFCOA: Protecting sensitive information in family law proceedings](https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/fl/protected-confidences) (checked 2026-09-16)
- [FCFCOA: Financial proceedings practice direction](https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/fl/pd/fam-financial) (checked 2026-09-16)

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*