Your selected location:
30 Aug 2015

Family farms present a difficulty in family law property settlements.  Often, farmers are asset rich, but cash poor.  It may not be viable for the farm to remain intact in the course of dividing matrimonial property.  The farm itself may need to be sold and its value realised.  However, in so doing, one or both parties will be deprived of their livelihood.

 

Background

Each family law property matter (whether or not it includes a family farm) broadly involves a four step process:

1. Identify the assets and liabilities of the relationship;  
2. Identify the financial and non-financial contributions of the parties;
3. Assess the future needs of the parties;  
4. Consider whether the proposed division is fair to both parties in all the circumstances.

There are no separate rules relating to farms; Lee Steere (1985).  However, the characteristics particular to farming cases are:

a) Dealing with initial contributions compared with other contributions during the marriage;
b) Dealing with significant needs at the end of the marriage;
c) The small size of the net property; and
d) While it is desirable to mould orders around one party keeping the farm, that is only possible where such orders do not intrude upon the legitimate rights of the other party.

Step 1: Is the Farm in the Asset Pool?

If a farm is owned in the names of the parties in their own right, then it will be included in the asset pool.

 

Where the farm is held by a company or a trust, and one of the parties has a controlling position in that entity, then the farm is likely to fall into the asset pool.  However, some trust structures prevent the trust assets from being considered a part of the asset pool.  The test that the court uses is whether one of the parties has actual or de facto control of the trust.  If one of the parties has control, then it is matrimonial property and will very likely be included in the asset pool; Stein (1986).

If the trust is designed for the specific purpose of defeating Family Court Orders, then the court is likely to deem that trust a sham and draw assets of that trust into the matrimonial pool for division between the parties; Kennon & Spry (2008).

An expectation of an inheritance at some point in the future is not property, and the Court will not take any testamentary promise into account; White & Tulloch (1995).  A father’s promise to gift the family farm to his son upon the father’s death does not increase the size of the property pool available for division.

Step 2: Value of the Assets

Once the property pool has been identified, the assets must be attributed values.

Farms have particular types of assets, in addition to the farmland itself, that add value to the pool.  For example:

a) Crops in ground and crops harvested;
b) Stock;
c) Plant and equipment;
d) Water rights; and
e) Electricity sold back to the grid.

The collective values of these operational assets can be significant, and therefore it is important for any valuations to be clearly itemised.

Step 3: Contributions to the Farm

Traditionally, family farms are passed down from generation to generation.  If one spouse has inherited the farm, then the Court will consider the farm to be a financial contribution made by that party to the marriage.  This may increase the percentage of the asset pool to which that spouse is entitled, but the significance of that initial contribution will decrease over time.  Therefore, when the property was inherited and the length of the marriage is important.

One or both spouses will very likely have performed labour on the farm, for little or no wages.  The Court will take these non-financial contributions into account when calculating each spouse’s entitlements.

Step 4: Future Earning Capacity

One of the factors that the Court will consider is the effect of the property division on a party’s earning capacity.  If the property settlement calls for the farm to be sold, for example, then one or both parties will be deprived of their earning capacity.  If the property division calls for the party retaining the farm to borrow additional funds to pay the other spouse, that will increase the debt of the paying party, but will not per se affect their earning capacity.

Where possible, the Court will prefer settlement options that keep the farm intact.  However, those arrangements must also do justice to the spouse who is not living on the farm.  One such option may be for one spouse to retain the farm and pay a lump sum to the other spouse.  Indeed that is a very common scenario in settling farming matters, and in the Court’s determination of these types of matters at trial.

However, there is a limit to this line of thinking that the farm must be preserved intact.  The court in Lee Steere rejected the notion of preserving the farm at the wife’s expense.  In that case, the husband was given the opportunity to keep the farm and had an arrangement for delayed payment in three installments (with interest) to the wife, paid over an eight-month period.  The court will need to be satisfied of the wife’s immediate financial security if they are to make orders for delayed payment such as that ordered in Lee Steere.

Summary

While the Court does not have to preserve a family farm, it prefers to do so where possible.  However, the Court’s priority at all times is to ensure that the division of property is just and equitable to both spouses in all the circumstances.

The Court will not force a sale unless it is unavoidable in order to do justice to both parties, based upon:

a) The contributions of each party;
b) The future needs factors of each party; and 
c) Any prejudice to the party waiting on funds; Lee Steere (1985).

This is general information only, and does not constitute specific legal advice. If you would like further information in relation to this matter or other legal matters please contact our office on Freecall 1800 609 945 or email us now.

 

*This is general information only, and does not constitute specific legal advice. Please consult one of our experienced Legal Team for specific advice relevant to your situation.

Supporting Western Australian's for more than 100 years

"Always fast and thorough service. Thank you"

Sitka Pil

My circumstances at the time I made contact with HHG were dire following my argument being rejected by two no win no fee firms. Following my initial meeting with HHG's employment law team I was left feeling extremely positive by the response and concern shown by HHG in regards to their support of my argument along with their preparedness to pursue an outcome on my behalf.

I accept the fact that nobody really wins in these cases (mental health/ workplace) however the end result was what would be considered most favourable and far in excess of what would have been achieved had I not sought the advice from HHG.

I have no hesitation in recommending HHG to anyone caught up in the messy circumstances I found myself in at the time.

Great advice and five-star commitment to their client!!"

Nathan Lynch

"Thank you for such great assistance with the transaction of Flying Domestics on behalf of Lorna Good. It has been such a pleasure to work with the HHG Legal Group and I look forward to working with you in the future."

Jim Goodwin

"Simon Creek and his team were at all times empathic, professional and confident.  My matter needed to be addressed within a pressing time frame, and their availability at short notice and contact after hours was much appreciated.  It caused me considerable stress, but having such a thoroughly reliable and competent team to call on helped me to feel in control. Although I hope not to need their services again in future, I would be confident in doing so!"

Dr Lana Bell

"A good outcome is what we can expect.  A great outcome is a sign of a company which does the very best for their clients. A very big thank you to Daniel Morris for showing empathy towards my small and much needed legal action.

To HHG Legal Group, thank you for a great outcome.  I would recommend your company to anyone seeking legal services."

Jan Atkinson

"Your support this morning was amazingly kind, not to mention your totally reassuring competence, knowledge and wisdom that you used on my behalf.  It was extremely reassuring to have your knowledgeable support, and I particularly appreciated your real and obvious kindness to me. It means so much at a very difficult time. I'm so grateful to you."

Family Law Client

"Janene was very professional and we established a good rapport quickly. The subject of death and wills can be quite confronting to deal with, however, Janene's approach was soft and accommodating."

Lynette Livesey

"A big thank you to HHG for their professional service, continued support, and wide range of legal knowledge. Our clients have given us nothing but kind words regarding HHG Legal Group and so we have no hesitation in referring and recommending Simon Creek and HHG Legal Group for their outstanding services and legal expertise."

Nigel Plowman, Director at McKinley Plowman & Associates

"Simon is a friendly and practical legal advisor. I have received great feedback from the clients I have referred to him and his team at HHG Legal Group."

Richard Beal, Director at BDO

"Over the last few years, I have been impressed by Simon’s legal ability, management skills, entrepreneurial spirit, personal integrity and people skills. He appears to be that rare breed of lawyer – both knowledgeable and commercial."

Michael Malone, Founder of iiNet

"Our family has been a client of HHG Legal Group over many years.  Business has included drawing up of wills for three generations and preparing of probate for my father in law. I would have no hesitation in recommending HHG Legal Group to anyone requiring such services."

Bernice Climie

"You should be congratulated for the manner in which your staff address clients and we found our dealings with your company, once again a very pleasant experience and we would like to truly thank you for your efforts."

Steve Harvey and Jane Powell

"HHG Legal were absolutely fantastic. Extremely responsive and brought calm to our chaotic family situation through their knowledge and caring attitude. Extremely professional from our very first contact with them and they expertly guided our family though the required legal process over almost a 12 month period."

Amanda Williamson

"Fantastic team! They really care about their client. Tim Colcutt is a 'go that extra mile' guy who gives his client his all. I can't recommend HHG and Tim enough."

Kerry Samson

"I had a fantastic lawyer in Anne Hurley. She helped me out a great deal with good, sound advice in a friendly, professional manner. First class, thanks Anne"

Graeme Hammond

"Marine Plant Systems has been working with HHG Legal Group for a few years now and they continually provide first-class service. Their professional advice has been invaluable to our company."

Carolin Grimm - Marine Plant Systems

"We were kept up to date at all times. Pricing was always updated over the time period so we remained "in budget". Personal access to someone whenever I had questions. All in all a great experience without too much fuss."

Rosslyn Tasker - COO AltusQ Pty Ltd

"Good service you can count on."

Miles Lee

"HHG Legal Group has provided outstanding support as I have taken the journey of buying a business, their professionalism is beyond reproach. Their assistance throughout the Due Diligence process has been invaluable, I would fully recommend them."

Mark Armitage

"Very friendly and efficient service - what a pleasure working with Anne."

Jacques Taylor

"I highly recommend Daniel from HHG Legal Mandurah. When dealing with a complicated legal property matter recently I was extremely impressed by Daniel's honesty and integrity and the legal advice I received. I am very happy with the service from HHG Legal."

Tony Walker

Select your location:

Please select your nearest office location so we can show you the most relevant information.