Research Highlight Five 1
Prenuptial/
Contracting Out
Agreements
November 2022
Nicola Taylor and Megan Gollop
Faculty of Law | Te Kaupeka Tātai Ture
University of Otago | Te Whare Wānanga o Ōtākou
New Zealand | Aotearoa
Introduction
The Property (Relationships) Act 1976 (PRA) sets out
the rules for how the property of two partners is
divided when they separate.
2
The key principle is that
‘relationship property’, as deined by the Act, should be
divided equally between the two partners when their
relationship ends (the ‘equal sharing law’).
3
In New Zealand, most separated couples do not go
to the Family Court to have their property division
determined under the PRA. Mostly, people work it out
themselves, often by seeking advice from lawyers
about the law, dispute resolution processes, and their
entitlements under the PRA. Sometimes, when former
partners cannot agree on how to divide their property,
they may negotiate between their lawyers, or involve a
mediator, arbitrator or the Family Court.
1 The research informed a review of the Property (Relationships) Act 1976;
see Te Aka Matua o te Ture | Law Commission Review of the Property
(Relationships) Act 1976 – Te Arotake i te Property (Relationships) Act 1976
(NZLC Report | Pūrongo 143, 2019)
2 PRA 1976, ss 1C(1), 10A and 25(2). Note that the PRA can also apply to the
division of relationship property on the death of one spouse or partner:
ss 1C(1) and 10B.
3 PRA 1976, s 1C(3).
Research Highlight
5
This Research Highlight is based on indings from
research about relationship property division in
New Zealand,
1
led by researchers from the Faculty of
Law at the University of Otago, and generously funded
by the Michael and Suzanne Borrin Foundation. This
research was undertaken in two phases:
• Phase One involved a nationwide telephone survey
ascertaining public attitudes and values about
post-separation relationship property division.
During 2018, 1,361 telephone interviews were
undertaken with a representative sample of 1,011
people, with additional interviews with 150 Māori,
100 Pasiika and 100 Asian respondents.
• Phase Two examined how separated couples
divided their property and resolved any disputes.
During 2020, an anonymous nationwide online
survey was completed by 378 people and 110 of
these respondents also participated in a telephone
interview about their experiences and perspectives.
The majority of the 378 survey respondents were
women (82%), were born in New Zealand (79%), and
had a tertiary qualiication (71%). Most identiied as
New Zealand European (89%) and/or Māori (7%).
For full details of the study methods, participants
and indings, please refer to our research reports and
summaries, referenced at the end of this Research
Highlight.
2 Prenuptial/Contracting Out Agreements
Research Highlight 5
Couples can, however, make their own agreement
in advance about how they would like their property
to be divided if they were to separate in the future.
They can choose to opt out of the PRA with a formal
contracting out agreement so the equal sharing law will
not apply.
4
These agreements can be made at any time
by a couple already in, or about to enter, a marriage,
civil union or de facto relationship. The agreement will
be void (i.e., not valid or legally binding) unless certain
requirements are met:
• the agreement is in writing;
• each party has had independent legal advice before
signing the agreement;
• the signature of each party is witnessed by a lawyer;
and
• the lawyer who witnesses the signature has certiied
that, before the party signed the agreement,
they explained the eect and implications of the
agreement to the party.
5
4 PRA 1976, s 21.
5 PRA 1976, s 21F. Note that, even when an agreement satisies these legal
requirements, the court can set it aside if satisied that giving eect to it
would cause serious injustice: s 21J.
These requirements allow couples the freedom to
choose how to divide their property in a way they both
see it, whilst also ensuring a fair and just division of
property between partners who may be of unequal
bargaining positions. This helps to safeguard people
from signing away their right to an equal share of
the relationship property without understanding
their statutory entitlements under the PRA and the
implications of the agreement for them.
Instead of entering into a formal contracting out
agreement, couples may decide to just make an
informal agreement, either verbally or in writing,
between themselves. This will not be a legally
enforceable agreement because it won’t meet the
legal requirements set out above. However, informal
agreements can still assist couples to clarify their
intentions regarding the division of their property
should they later separate.
In this Research Highlight, we use the term ‘prenuptial
agreement’ to refer to any agreement about the division
of relationship property made by a couple prior to
separation. This includes both formal contracting out
agreements and informal verbal or written agreements.
We use this term because the participants in our
research commonly referred to such agreements as
‘prenups’ or ‘prenuptial agreements’. However, we
distinguish between formal and informal agreements in
the text that follows when this is important.
Research Highlight Five 3
Research Highlight 5
How Common Were Prenuptial Agreements?
It was not common for the participants to have had an
agreement with their partner about how their property
would be divided should they separate (see Figure
1). Only around 10% had made a formal contracting
out agreement with a partner that had been certiied
by a lawyer. Even fewer (9%) had made some type of
informal agreement, with most of these being just
a verbal agreement. Sometimes participants had
considered making an agreement, but hadn’t discussed
it with their partner and, for those who did discuss
this, an agreement was not always made. In fact, it was
far more common for couples to have not considered
making any agreement at all. Overall, 72% hadn’t
discussed making one and most (81%) had had no
prenuptial agreement, either formal or informal.
Figure 1: Prevalence of prenuptial agreements
10%
72%
9%
9%
No agreement Discussed but
no agreement
Informal verbal or
written agreement
Formal contracting
out agreement
4 Prenuptial/Contracting Out Agreements
Research Highlight 5
Why Didn’t People Make Prenuptial Agreements?
Participants gave various reasons for why they did not
make, or consider making, a prenuptial agreement.
Most commonly, they said they had had no need for
one, particularly when each partner had brought assets
of a similar value into the relationship or the couple had
too little property to warrant making such agreement.
This was particularly the case for participants who
had been married some time ago in an era when such
agreements were not common and young couples
began married life with few assets.
It was not common when we were married. Never
thought it would apply to us.
We were together since aged 15, so didn’t need it.
We both entered the relationship with low value of
assets. We both contributed to the growth of our
asset base.
For others, the reasons for not having an agreement
related to perceptions about the relationship. Some
had (sometimes misguided) trust in their partner to act
fairly and/or faith that their relationship would not break
down. There were also concerns that any discussion
about an agreement could adversely aect the
relationship by implying a lack of trust or an expectation
that it might not last.
Probably not the most romantic or display of trust.
When you go into a relationship, you’re in love
with someone. You don’t think these things will be
an issue down the track. You’ve rose-tinted glasses
on really.
They can make it very awkward and makes one
partner feel like the other doesn’t trust them.
The cost of seeking legal advice to meet the
requirements for a formal contracting out agreement
(that was legally enforceable) was challenging for some
participants. Concerns were also expressed that there
was little point in having an agreement because it could
be easily dismissed or might not be enforceable after a
period of time.
Instead of having a prenuptial agreement, some
participants had opted to protect their assets (or
thought they had done so) with a trust. This, however,
had not always been suiciently protective.
I actually thought the fact that the house was in the
trust eectively ringfenced that. I will never enter
another relationship without a prenup again. It’s
cost me a lot of money over the years.
There were also those who had wanted an agreement,
but their partner had not or had refused to have one.
In some cases, a proposal for a prenuptial agreement
had been met with strong opposition, threats, or
manipulative behaviour.
My ex said he would not marry me if I insisted on a
prenup agreement.
We briely discussed an agreement, but it was met
with signiicant resistance from my partner, so we
didn’t discuss it further.
Research Highlight Five 5
Research Highlight 5
Were Prenuptial Agreements Followed in the
Property Division?
Prenuptial agreements aim to provide couples
with clarity and certainty in advance about how
their property will be divided should they separate.
Around two-thirds of the participants who had had
an agreement said they were followed (either fully or
partially) when they divided their property. However, the
type of agreement was important. Formal contracting
out agreements were much more likely to be followed
than informal ones – most (84%) formal contracting out
agreements were fully, or partially, followed compared
with only 44% of informal agreements (see Figure 2).
When formal contracting out agreements were not
fully or partially followed, this most commonly related
to a lack of robustness in the wording of the agreement
and/or lawyers or parties believing the agreement was
out of date or void. Sometimes both parties jointly
agreed not to follow the agreement if they thought it
was no longer applicable.
There was a technicality in the witnessing of the
prenup and it was thrown out on that basis only.
Her lawyer argued it was too old and
unenforceable.
The agreement was not particularly robust
legally. My ex and I also felt that it was out-of-date.
It was written when we irst bought our house
before children.
The most common reasons given for why informal
agreements were not followed were that one party
changed their mind, reneged on the agreement, and/or
denied that such an agreement existed. Sometimes this
happened after a former partner sought legal advice
and was informed of their property entitlements under
the PRA and/or discovered that the agreement was void
because it had not been certiied by a lawyer. In some
instances, the agreement was not followed because one
party did not seek compliance with all of its aspects in
order to reach a settlement.
My partner disregarded the verbal agreement
we had. … No come back for a verbal agreement.
My ex-partner decided to follow legal advice which
said our verbal agreement didn’t stand.
We had a very clear verbal agreement and I had
talked to her about getting that put in writing
before we got married. But that created issues and
we never got round to doing that I guess. [When]
she saw her lawyer, that verbal agreement no
longer existed!
Agreement not followed
56%
16%
Agreement partially followed
15%
21%
Agreement fully followed
29%
63%
Informal prenuptial
agreement
Formal contracting
out agreement
Figure 2: Whether formal and informal agreements
were followed
6 Prenuptial/Contracting Out Agreements
Research Highlight 5
How Helpful Was Having a Prenuptial Agreement?
Overall, more participants found having a prenuptial
agreement helpful (42%) than found them unhelpful
(37%). These agreements were considered helpful
because they:
• Provided greater clarity and certainty.
• Relected the inancial contributions made by each
partner.
• Provided evidence of what had been previously
agreed.
• Acknowledged the separate assets and debts/
liabilities of each partner.
• Enabled property to be divided more easily, quickly
and fairly.
• Removed stress and conlict.
• Provided a starting, or fall-back, position for
negotiation.
• Ensured parties were not inancially disadvantaged in
the property division.
• Meant they were in a much better inancial position
than they would have been had they not contracted
out of the PRA and avoided equal sharing.
Made it much easier to agree who owned what and
the inancial implications and what assets during
the relationship needed to be divided.
Having the legal document that gave a bare bones
outline of what would happen deinitely helped.
Because, even though there was some wiggle
room about exactly when it would all come to pass
and the inal numbers, at least we knew what we
were working towards.
The prenup provided excellent evidence of
unequal sharing in my favour when [my] former
partner was denying we had agreed.
I would say it could be hard for any couple starting
out to make such an agreement as you don’t enter
thinking you’ll separate. I didn’t. But pre-planning
is really wonderful. Knowing what a split would
involve helps for knowing boundaries and also
what each party would legally be entitled to – no
surprises.
Made it clearer with less room for argument.
However, the type of agreement was important in how
helpful they were considered to be. Around half of
those who had a formal contracting out agreement
certiied by a lawyer found it helpful, compared to only
around a third of those who had an informal agreement.
An agreement was also more likely to be considered
helpful when it had been followed for the property
division and this was more likely when the agreement
was a formal one.
Issues with prenuptial agreements were reported.
Formal contracting out agreements could be
problematic if they were not speciic or clear enough,
leaving them open to interpretation. This could lead to
them being “twisted” by lawyers and overturned.
My ex-partner’s lawyer found a loophole and tried
to argue the agreement. … It wasn’t worth the
paper it was written on.
The agreement should have been clear. However,
missed wording left it open to varying the value.
As noted above, those with informal agreements
sometimes reported that these were not legally
enforceable and were disregarded, reneged on, not
honoured, or denied.
Agreements made some time ago and not updated
could fail to relect a change in circumstances, such
as the birth of children, the lengthy duration of a
relationship or the assets since accumulated.
It was good to a point, but should have been
revisited and updated like a will or any other
agreement.
The prenuptial agreement did not take into
account that we had children and that therefore
our need to provide, and our ability to provide,
had changed radically since we irst entered into
the agreement.
Research Highlight Five 7
Research Highlight 5
Once Bitten, Twice Shy
While very few participants in our research had
prenuptial agreements (either formal or informal), many
regretted not having had one and, in hindsight, wished
that they had.
I was too naïve at the start of the relationship to
think about this. Deinitely should have done it
regarding [my] family inheritance.
I will forever regret the decision not to have a
prenup. I was too scared to raise the issue and
thought my marriage would be permanent.
I regret not protecting my home for my children.
I lost equity from the relationship and have
struggled inancially since. I was too trusting.
Similarly, some who had only made an informal
agreement, wished that they had formalised it with
lawyers to make it legally enforceable.
I should have got a real agreement from a lawyer
instead of trusting my ex’s word.
I just wish I’d put pen to paper with it, but that’s
hindsight. You don’t expect at that time when
things are joyous that things won’t be down
the track.
I wish to God I had formalised it. I was advised
to protect myself legally, but didn’t.
While only 10% of the participants had had a formal
contracting out agreement, nearly six times (56%)
as many had (or would have) an agreement in place
for current or future relationships because of their
experience of post-separation property division. Many
of those who had already re-partnered had made a
prenuptial agreement with their current partner. Others
said they would only contemplate entering a new
relationship with such an agreement in place.
Nearly three-quarters of those who had had an informal
agreement thought they would get, or had already
obtained, a prenuptial agreement, with a new partner.
This was thought to be particularly important for
people entering a new relationship with considerable
assets and/or children from a previous relationship
which they wished to protect.
6
Others wanted to have
a prenuptial agreement to acknowledge that they were
bringing less into the relationship, so as to protect their
new partner’s assets.
Naïve, trusting, loyal. Never thought I would
ever get divorced, so this never crossed my mind.
I am, without a shadow of a doubt, sure about my
partner now, but still have entered one to cover
ourselves.
I would certainly go to overt lengths if my new
lady friend had property to make sure that she
ringfenced that before our relationship got to any
serious part. The last thing I would want is to be
seen by her children or siblings or any other family
to think that I was seeking out assets that she may
have. … Purely from the point of view that I would
be contributing zero.
I will never go into a relationship without one now.
You have to protect yourself.
It’s about protecting the future of the kids.
I think if I ever decided to do that again, I would
have a prenup and something in writing that says,
‘Right, this is yours and this is mine and that’s that’.
Hopefully that would be legally binding because I
have heard that sometimes they aren’t. … I used to
just think that prenups were absolutely ridiculous
and why would you ever do that, but I can see why,
especially if, for example, you are a home owner
and your new partner is not, or whatever that looks
like. That’s a lot to lose a second time.
6 This is consistent with the indings of two recent surveys of New Zealand
family lawyers which noted an increase in the number of people aged
over 50 years seeking legal advice about formal (s 21) contracting out
agreements – 66% of the lawyers reported this in 2017, and 85% in
2019: New Zealand Relationship Property Survey 2017 (Grant Thornton
and Family Law Section, New Zealand Law Society, October 2017); New
Zealand Relationship Property Survey 2019 (Grant Thornton and Family
Law Section, New Zealand Law Society, November 2019).
8 Prenuptial/Contracting Out Agreements
Research Highlight 5
Pros and Cons
Both positive and negative views were expressed about
prenuptial agreements. Many participants thought that
they were a very good idea and strongly recommended
them or regretted not having had one themselves.
Whilst acknowledging that raising the issue with a new
partner could be awkward or diicult, and perhaps be
regarded as implying a lack of trust in the relationship,
they urged others to consider getting a prenuptial
agreement. Some even went so far as to suggest that
they ought to be compulsory or automatic, with people
having to opt out of (rather than opt into) one.
I would almost say everyone who gets married
to just have a prenup mandatory. Like it should
just be a thing. … I know it sounds unromantic
and cynical, I get all of that, but it’s never a bad
idea to just give a quick glance to what if that
rainy day comes? Because at the end of the day,
you have to look after yourself, you know. If you’re
splitting from someone, you’re splitting for a
reason and they’re certainly not going to look after
you and, you know, they have no obligation to look
after you, so you’ve just got to be smart and look
after yourself.
This is a very good idea. I have entered into a
prenuptial agreement with my current partner
given my past experience. I have suggested this
and support others to do the same. We all agree
this was a diicult conversation … but it saves the
relationship issues in many ways. I feel much more
secure in my relationship with this in place given
my past experience.
These are diicult. Their existence suggests you
are considering that the relationship might fail.
This is a reasonable position to take, but could
imply a lack of conidence. On the whole, I think
they are well worth considering if you have assets
of some signiicance (both kind and amount).
It was the absolute saving grace in this mess.
… When you buy a house, you buy an insurance
policy. No one gets oended when they buy an
insurance policy, so why would you get oended
when a prenup is essentially an insurance policy
for your marriage. Why would you do that? So,
I just think people’s attitude towards it needs to
change a bit because it’s probably going to save
a lot of grief.
While the cost of legal advice could discourage people
from obtaining a formal contracting out agreement,
some participants thought that the money they had
spent on legal fees had been well worth it and, in the
long-run, had saved them a lot of money because they
avoided having to share property equally with their
former partner.
It saved me inancially. Otherwise I would have
paid o the debts he arrived with, I would have
paid most of the mortgage and I would have left
with not enough to buy a house.
I think for the service that I got, with the beneit
of hindsight, it was obviously worth it. Because it
saved me hundreds of thousands of dollars.
However, prenuptial agreements were sometimes
regarded less positively. Some participants were
concerned that these agreements (particularly
informal ones) could be easily overturned, contested
or invalidated.
I’ve also seen in case law, people that have had
prenups and they’ve been overruled. So, they’re
not the be all and end all and the saviour that some
people have thought they are.
Research Highlight Five 9
Research Highlight 5
Being pressured or coerced into either making, or
conversely, not making, a prenuptial agreement was
also reported. This could result in participants being
disadvantaged by the property division outcome.
Some thought that agreements made under duress,
when in situations involving inancial disparity, family
violence, and/or unequal contributions, could result
in unfair property divisions, undermine statutory
principles designed to protect vulnerable parties, and
be a form of inancial abuse.
Where there is a power imbalance and
inancial disparity, a prenup can be created in
circumstances of duress and unfair bargaining.
Having a prenuptial was very unhelpful for me.
I was forced to sign it. I was in a very abusive
relationship, so I signed it to have the peace. …
I renounced on my rights by signing the prenuptial.
Maybe some are good, but mine was awful and
very abusive. … A prenuptial agreement is good
when it’s fair but, if you are forced like I was, I ind
it personally very bad and useless.
10 Prenuptial/Contracting Out Agreements
Research Highlight 5
What People Recommended
As well as recommending the use of prenuptial
agreeements, some participants also suggested that
these should include clauses for dealing with valuations
and ongoing post-separation household costs (such as
rates, insurance, mortgage payments etc.) while the
property division was being sorted out.
Having in the contracting out agreement what
would happen in terms of who pays for what
during the separation process, because I think
that tends to be forgotten about. The agreement
is about how things are going to be divided but
it doesn’t talk about, okay, well, who pays the
mortgage, rates, insurance while the separation
occurs because that can take months, and that’s
thousands of dollars and expenses that someone’s
got to cover. So, we didn’t outline what was going
to happen in that case, so I think in hindsight it
would have been good to have something like that.
The need to review and update agreements to take
changing circumstances into account was also advised.
These sorts of agreements are essential whether
or not you’re getting married or you’re just in a de
facto relationship. … It’s important to have them
signed, have them sorted and then put them in
a drawer. But then you also need to get them out
of the drawer every now and then and make sure
that they’re still it for purpose. … These need
to be living documents that change as people’s
situations change.
Participants also recommended making the process
of obtaining and/or updating a prenuptial agreement
easier, simpler and cheaper.
Having to get my lawyer to put it together and
then send it to her lawyer and then pay two
dierent bills. The whole thing just seemed really,
really diicult. I totally understand the intention
of the law. … You don’t want a situation where a
partner just puts a contract in front of someone
and coerces them to sign it. The intention of the
law is very much to make sure that everyone’s on
an equal footing. I do wonder if there needs to be
a process to make these sorts of things easier to
do, because I’m also aware that [the cost] is a huge
barrier to a lot of people.
It would be great if they were more, maybe,
mainstream and not considered to be something
that rich people do or something that people
who’ve had children from previous relationships. …
Something that’s relatively simple and mainstream
that people could do that sparks conversations.
Research Highlight Five 11
Research Highlight 5
Summary
Making a prenuptial or contracting out agreement
is a personal decision by a couple already in, or about
to enter, a marriage, civil union or de facto relationship
regarding the division of their relationship property
should they separate in the future. Our research has
shown the importance of, at the very least, considering
whether an agreement might be useful. Such
conversations can be awkward or diicult because
these agreements are not currently mainstream.
However, many of those who had experienced the
division of their relationship property without one,
later became strong advocates for their use – either,
personally, when they entered a new relationship or,
more generally, by other people.
Ideally, prenuptial agreements should be formal
contracting out agreements that comply with the
PRA’s legal requirements, rather than informal verbal
or written agreements. While informal arrangements
might be suicient at times, our research found that
they were not as helpful, or as likely to be followed,
as formal contracting out agreements were. Obtaining
independent legal advice, as is necessary with a formal
contracting out agreement, also helps to ensure the
agreement is fair for each partner and that no coercion
is involved. This can better safeguard and protect
each person.
Our research also identiied the importance of ensuring
that prenuptial agreements are clearly written, regularly
reviewed and updated if necessary (e.g., when children
are born, an inheritance is received, or new assets/
debts are acquired). Thinking of these as “living
documents”, that need to be revisited will help ensure
they remain it for purpose, and therefore valid and
enforceable, if ever needed.
The Law Commission’s recent review of the PRA
concluded that the current contracting out provisions
already strike “the right balance” as the PRA:
… gives partners the freedom to make their own
agreements about how their property should be
divided on separation while protecting vulnerable
partners by ensuring that they enter such
agreements with informed consent.
7
Perhaps the time has arrived for greater public
awareness and debate about whether contracting
out agreements, and/or discussions between partners
about them, should become more commonplace when
new relationships form.
7 Te Aka Matua o te Ture | Law Commission (2019), see n 5 above, Executive
Summary, p. 16, para 67. The Law Commission did, however, recommend
four improvements to the contracting out regime: use of audio-visual
technology by lawyers to witness a partner signing an agreement;
repealing the provisions relating to a model form agreement; enabling
courts to set aside seriously unjust agreements wholly or in part; and
courts having regard to the best interests of any minor or dependent
children when considering whether to give eect to a non-compliant
agreement or to set aside an agreement because it would cause serious
injustice (para 68).
12 Prenuptial/Contracting Out Agreements
Research Highlight 5
Research Reports and Summaries
Phase One
Ian Binnie, Nicola Taylor, Megan Gollop, Mark Henaghan, Shirley
Simmonds and Jeremy Robertson, Relationship Property Division
in New Zealand: Public Attitudes and Values. A General Population
Survey (Technical Research Report, Michael and Suzanne Borrin
Foundation, Wellington, New Zealand, 2018).
Ian Binnie, Nicola Taylor, Megan Gollop, Mark Henaghan, Shirley
Simmonds and Jeremy Robertson, Relationship Property Division
in New Zealand: Public Attitudes and Values. A General Population
Survey (Research Summary, Michael and Suzanne Borrin
Foundation, Wellington, New Zealand, 2018).
https://www.borrinfoundation.nz/report-relationship-property-
division-in-new-zealand-public-attitudes-and-values
Phase Two
Megan Gollop, Nicola Taylor, Ian Binnie, Mark Henaghan and Jeremy
Robertson, Relationship Property Division in New Zealand: The
Experiences of Separated People (Descriptive Research Report,
Children’s Issues Centre, Faculty of Law, University of Otago,
Dunedin, New Zealand, 2021).
Megan Gollop and Nicola Taylor, Relationship Property Division
in New Zealand: The Experiences of Separated People (Research
Summary, Children’s Issues Centre, Faculty of Law, University of
Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand, 2022).
https://www.otago.ac.nz/cic/research/index.html#relationship-
property
ISBN 978-1-99-117744-5
Please cite this as: Nicola Taylor and Megan Gollop, Prenuptial/Contracting Out Agreements (Research Highlight 5, Michael
and Suzanne Borrin Foundation, Wellington, New Zealand, 2022).
Many thanks to the Michael and Suzanne Borrin Foundation, Ian Binnie (Solasta Consulting), Professor Mark Henaghan
(University of Auckland), Dr Jeremy Robertson, Nicola Liebergreen (Assistant Research Fellow), Blair Hughson (Core
Development), and Helen McQueen and Nichola Lambie (Te Aka Matua o te Ture | Law Commission) for their invaluable
contributions to the research project. Particular thanks to the many participants for sharing their views on, and
experiences of, post-separation relationship property division.
Relationship Property Division in NZ
Research Highlight Series
There are six Research Highlights in this series.
Each provides helpful information and advice about:
1. Knowledge and Understanding of Relationship
Property Division
2. Relationship Property Division: Insights From
Those Who’ve ‘Been There, Done That’
3. How the Relationship Between Former Partners
Aects Their Property Division
4. The Challenges and Impact of Relationship
Property Division
5. Prenuptial/Contracting Out Agreements
6. Dividing Relationship Property: A Guide about
Issues to Consider
