Legal Project Management Plan & Checklist
Purpose of this Guide: Use this fork when a client wants a financial agreement in place before a marriage ceremony or before moving in together as a de facto couple. These agreements - commonly called prenups - are entirely legal and enforceable in Australia, but they carry the highest risk of being set aside by a court if proper safeguards are not followed. The main dangers are pressure or ultimatums close to the wedding date, insufficient time for the other party to obtain independent advice, and a significant power imbalance between the parties. This fork layers additional protective steps on top of the main plan to manage those risks. Verify current guidelines on the official Australia Government Portal. Access services via the .
Jurisdiction: Federal - governed by section 90B (intending to marry) or section 90UB (intending to commence a de facto relationship) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). No court filing required. Verify current guidelines on the official Australia Government Portal.
The Process at a Glance: Calculate how many days remain until the wedding or move-in date. If fewer than 42 days remain, immediately escalate to the firm's Legal Director before doing any work. Serve the first draft on the other party's solicitor as early as possible - ideally at least 6 weeks before the imminent event - and preserve all Track Changes exchange records as proof of genuine negotiation. Ensure no correspondence ever frames the agreement as a take-it-or-leave-it condition of the relationship. Deliver written independent legal advice to each party in a private conference. Execute only after genuine negotiation is evidenced on both sides. Verify current guidelines on the official Australia Government Portal. Access services via the Federal Register of Legislation.
Key Legislation and Case Law: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 90B (pre-marriage agreement), s 90UB (pre-de facto agreement), s 90G(1) and s 90UJ(1) (binding requirements including ILA), s 90K(1)(e) (setting aside for unconscionable conduct), s 90UM(1)(e) (de facto equivalent). [Thorne v Kennedy [2017] HCA 49](https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/2017/49.html) - the High Court set aside a pre-nuptial agreement because it was presented as a non-negotiable condition of marriage to a financially dependent party with limited English and few days to obtain advice. The court applied both undue influence and unconscionable conduct. Risk factors: visa dependence, pregnancy, significant wealth disparity, fixed wedding date used as leverage, 'take it or leave it' framing. [Black v Black [2008] FamCAFC 7](https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FamCAFC/2008/7.html) - agreement void for citing wrong statutory section.
* Disclaimer: We're nobody's lawyer, because we aren't lawyers. You are, so you know better than to take legal advice from an app. We also aren't accountants or dog trainers - just digital spirit guides taking zero liability for any of this. This site exists to gather the collective knowledge of practitioners like you. Verify everything and submit your feedback on the Binding Financial Agreement - Drafting and Execution - Pre-Nuptial or Pre-Cohabitation Agreement (Thorne Risk Protocol) matter plan to improve the playbook. THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE, it's a request for input.
This legal matter plan provides a structured workflow for Family Law cases, outlining the standard Transactional Drafting process. Utilize these tracking templates to manage your legal cases efficiently.
Verify all prerequisite documentation has been obtained, cross-reference against the statutory requirements for this matter type, and confirm compliance with practice direction protocols.
Thorne v Kennedy [2017] HCA 49 at [3]-[6]: The wife had approximately 2 weeks to consider the agreement before the wedding, was financially dependent on the husband, had limited social connections in Australia, and was told the wedding would not proceed without her signature. The High Court held the agreement was voidable for undue influence and unconscionable conduct. The 42-day buffer represents the minimum risk-mitigation standard adopted in best-practice Australian family law firms following Thorne.
Prepare the relevant forms and supporting materials required under the applicable legislation, ensuring all mandatory fields are completed and all attachments are properly certified.
Draft and dispatch formal correspondence addressing the procedural requirements at this stage, including any required notices, requests for information, or proposals for resolution.
Pascot and Pascot [2020] FamCAFC - the court examined in detail whether the ILA actually addressed the future change of circumstances question. The advising solicitor's file notes were the primary battleground. The advice must go beyond a formulaic recitation and genuinely grapple with the client's specific circumstances.
Coordinate the collection and review of all financial documentation required for disclosure, including statements, valuations, and supporting schedules as mandated by the rules.