BFAs For Medical Professionals And High-Income Earners

A binding financial agreement (BFA) lets medical professionals and high-income earners in Australia decide in advance how their assets, practice, and income will be divided if a relationship ends.

Made under the Family Law Act 1975, a BFA can protect a medical practice, future earnings, superannuation, and family wealth while keeping these matters out of court.

It gives high earners the certainty, control and privacy that a standard court property settlement cannot.

For people whose wealth took years of training and personal sacrifice to build, the financial difference in high-value asset pools can be substantial and may run into millions.

Why Do Medical Professionals and High-Income Earners Need a BFA?

Medical professionals and high-income earners need a binding financial agreement because they usually bring more assets, valuable practice, and strong future earning power into a relationship, all of which can be divided on separation.

A BFA records who keeps what before any dispute arises, which protects wealth that would otherwise be open to a claim. This matters most for people whose net worth is concentrated in a single career or business.

The numbers show why this group is exposed.

In 2024, the Australian Bureau of Statistics recorded 47,216 divorces granted in Australia. The median age at divorce was 47.1 years for men and 44.1 years for women, and the median length of a marriage from wedding to divorce was 13.2 years.

By that age, a doctor or senior professional has often reached peak earnings and built a large asset pool, so a separation at this stage can put a lifetime of work at risk.

Income for this group sits far above the national average. According to the Australian Taxation Office, surgeons were the highest paid occupation in 2022-23, with 4,247 individuals reporting an average taxable income of $472,475.

A larger income and asset base means a larger pool to divide, which is exactly why high earners benefit from setting the terms in advance rather than leaving them to a court.

What Can a BFA Protect for Doctors and High-Income Earners?

A BFA can protect a medical or professional practice, future income, superannuation, family trusts, company structures, investments, and assets owned before the relationship began.

It does this by quarantining named assets so they stay with one party if the relationship ends.

The agreement can also confirm how jointly built wealth will be shared, which removes guesswork later.

How Does a BFA Protect a Medical or Professional Practice?

A BFA protects a medical practice by recording that the practice, its goodwill and its equity are to remain with the practitioner rather than form part of a divisible asset pool.

This protection depends on the agreement being valid, because a practice can still be considered by a court if the BFA is later set aside.

Without this, a practice built over many years can be valued and counted in the asset pool, even if the other partner never worked in it.

A practice is often a doctor’s single most valuable asset, so leaving it unprotected creates real risk.

The agreement can also deal with how practice income, retained earnings and any partner buy-in are treated.

This is useful where a practitioner co-owns a clinic with colleagues, because a messy separation can drag business partners into a dispute they had no part in.

Clear terms keep the practice running while a personal matter is resolved.

Can a BFA Protect Future Income and Earning Capacity?

A BFA can place limits on claims against future income and earning capacity, including future spousal maintenance, as long as the agreement is properly drafted and meets the requirements of the Family Law Act.

For high earners, future earning capacity is a major financial resource, though it is not a simple divisible asset in the way a bank account or a property is.

For a surgeon or senior doctor in their forties with decades of high earnings ahead, a BFA can reduce uncertainty around future income and maintenance claims, subject to the Family Law Act and any later set-aside challenge.

The agreement should be specific about what it covers.

A clause that tries to remove every possible maintenance claim can also fail under the Family Law Act if, at the time, a party could not support themselves without an income-tested pension or benefit, so balanced and realistic terms are safer than blanket exclusions.

How Are Trusts and Company Structures Treated in a BFA?

A BFA can address assets held through family trusts and company structures, but it can only deal with property and financial resources that the parties actually own or control.

Many high-income earners hold wealth through a discretionary trust or a company for tax and asset protection reasons, and a court can still look behind these structures in a property dispute.

A well drafted agreement names these interests and sets out how they are to be treated. There are limits worth understanding.

A BFA generally cannot bind a third party, such as another trustee or business shareholder, so the agreement protects the practitioner’s interest rather than the whole structure.

Careful drafting that matches the real ownership of each asset is what makes this protection hold up.

What Happens to Superannuation Under a BFA?

Superannuation can be split or quarantined under a BFA, because superannuation is treated as property that can be divided when a relationship ends.

For high earners with large balances or self-managed funds, this can be a significant part of the asset pool.

A BFA can record that each party keeps their own super, or it can set out an agreed split. The agreement must follow the superannuation splitting rules in the Family Law Act to be effective.

Super held in a self-managed fund can be complex to value and divide, so getting the wording right at the start avoids costly arguments if the relationship later breaks down.

What Does the Family Law Act Say About BFAs?

The Family Law Act 1975 allows couples to make a binding financial agreement before, during or after a marriage or de facto relationship, and sets strict rules for when that agreement is binding.

For married couples, agreements are made under sections 90B, 90C or 90D, while de facto couples generally use sections 90UB, 90UC or 90UD.

Western Australia is an exception, because most property matters for de facto couples there are dealt with under the Family Court Act 1997 (WA) rather than the federal de facto provisions.

The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia confirms that independent legal advice is mandatory before a financial agreement is signed.

The technical requirements are central to whether an agreement holds.

An agreement is only binding if it is in writing and signed by both parties, if each party received independent legal advice from a separate lawyer about the effect of the agreement, and if each party was given a signed statement from their lawyer confirming that advice, with a copy provided to the other party or their lawyer.

The statement does not have to be annexed to the agreement itself for these requirements to be met. These rules sit in section 90G for married couples and section 90UJ for de facto couples.

A court can also set an agreement aside in defined circumstances.

The set-aside powers in section 90K for marriages and section 90UM for de facto couples cover things such as fraud, a failure to disclose assets, agreements that are impractical to carry out, and conduct that makes it unjust to enforce the agreement.

This is why full and honest disclosure of every asset is so important for high earners with complex finances.

What Does Thorne v Kennedy Mean for High-Income Earners?

Thorne v Kennedy [2017] HCA 49 is the leading High Court case on binding financial agreements, and it confirmed that even a signed BFA can be set aside if one party was subject to undue influence or unconscionable conduct.

The case is a direct warning for wealthy people who want to protect their assets through a BFA. The facts involved a large wealth gap.

Mr Kennedy was a property developer worth between 18 and 24 million dollars, while Ms Thorne had moved to Australia to marry him and had almost no assets of her own.

He presented her with an agreement shortly before the wedding and told her the marriage would not go ahead unless she signed, despite her own lawyer advising strongly against it.

The High Court unanimously set aside both the pre-nuptial and the post-nuptial agreements.

The lesson for high earners is about process, not just paperwork.

An agreement is far harder to challenge when it is negotiated well ahead of any wedding, when both parties have genuine time to consider it, when there is full financial disclosure, and when the terms are not so one-sided that they look unfair.

Rushing a partner into signing under pressure is the surest way to see a carefully drafted agreement collapse later.

How Can High-Income Earners Stop a BFA From Being Set Aside?

High-income earners can reduce the risk of a BFA being set aside by following a careful process that removes any suggestion of pressure, secrecy or unfairness.

Courts look closely at how an agreement was made, so a sound process is as important as the words on the page.

The key steps that protect a high-value agreement are:

• Start early, well before any wedding or major commitment, so no one can claim they were rushed or pressured into signing.
• Give full and honest disclosure of every asset, including practices, trusts, companies and superannuation, so the agreement cannot be challenged for hidden assets.
• Ensure each party gets independent legal advice from their own separate lawyer and signs the required certificate.
• Keep the terms balanced enough that they are not grossly one-sided, since heavily lopsided agreements are easier to attack.
• Have the agreement professionally drafted to meet the technical requirements of the Family Law Act.

Doing these things does not remove every risk, but it gives the agreement the best chance of holding firm.

For someone with a great deal to lose, the cost of getting this right is small compared with the value being protected.

Binding Financial Agreement vs Court Property Settlement: Which Suits High Earners?

A BFA may suit many high-income earners who want control, privacy, and the ability to plan in advance, while a court property settlement hands the outcome to a judge and only begins once a dispute exists.

The table below compares the two paths across the points that matter most to doctors and high earners.

The clearest advantage of a BFA is timing.

Because it is made before any conflict, it lets a practitioner protect a practice and future income while both partners are still on good terms, rather than fighting over them after a relationship has already ended.

A court settlement, by contrast, only begins once a dispute exists, when feelings and legal costs are usually at their highest.

There are situations where a court order is still the right path, such as where parties cannot agree or where an existing agreement is flawed.

For most high earners, though, a properly prepared BFA is the more predictable and protective option.

Protect Your Wealth With a BFA Built for High-Income Earners

A binding financial agreement gives medical professionals and high-income earners a clear, lawful way to protect their practice, income, superannuation and family wealth before any relationship breakdown puts them at risk.

As binding financial agreement lawyers working with doctors and high earners across Australia, my law firm can prepare a fixed-fee agreement that is drafted to hold up and tailored to your assets.

Contact my law firm today on 1300-529-888 to arrange a confidential discussion about protecting what you have worked for.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do medical professionals really need a BFA?

Medical professionals often benefit from a BFA because they tend to hold valuable assets, a practice, and high future earnings that can all be divided on separation. A binding financial agreement records who keeps what in advance, protecting a practice and income that would otherwise be open to a claim if the relationship ended.

Can a BFA protect my medical practice from a property claim?

Yes, a BFA can record that your medical practice, its goodwill and its equity are to remain with you rather than form part of a divisible asset pool. Without this, a practice built over years can be valued and counted in a property settlement, even if your partner never worked in it. This protection depends on the agreement staying valid.

Can a binding financial agreement cover my future income?

A BFA can place limits on claims against your future income and earning capacity, including future spousal maintenance, if it is properly drafted under the Family Law Act. For high earners, future earnings are often the biggest asset, so this protection can be very valuable. Balanced terms work better than blanket exclusions that may be challenged.

Can a BFA be set aside by a court?

Yes, a court can set a BFA aside in defined situations, such as fraud, a failure to disclose assets, or unconscionable conduct. In Thorne v Kennedy, the High Court set aside agreements signed under pressure with a large wealth gap. Full disclosure, independent legal advice and early, balanced negotiation greatly reduce this risk.

Is superannuation included in a binding financial agreement?

Superannuation can be split or quarantined under a BFA, because super is treated as property that can be divided when a relationship ends. For high earners with large balances or a self-managed fund, this can form a major part of the asset pool. The agreement must follow the superannuation splitting rules to be effective.

When is the best time to make a BFA?

The best time to make a BFA is well before any wedding or major financial commitment, so no one can claim they were rushed or pressured. Early agreements give both parties time to seek advice and negotiate balanced terms, which makes the agreement far harder to challenge later if the relationship breaks down.