Market and non-market determinants of property valuations decided through the court system in family law separation in Australiadeveloping a scientific approach

Laburpena

Gender equality is not only a fundamental human right, but a necessary foundation for a peaceful, prosperous and sustainable world. Whilst there has been significant progress as part of a fundamental societal shift, a report by the UN (2022) has identified a further widening of the gender poverty gap. This study takes the perspective of evaluating property valuation of the matrimonial home in divorce cases and how this may contribute to gender inequality. Combining the areas of property valuation and gender inequality is a unique aspect of this study. Currently, this is an under researched area in real estate and family law and this thesis aims to fill this gap. The thesis includes a literature review, which provides a critical assessment of valuation evidence as a data source in research involving a discussion of valuation accuracy, valuation variation and valuation bias. The Australian family court system and the role of valuers as expert witnesses are also discussed in the literature review. Family law and divorce in the context of other countries worldwide are considered as well. The aim of this thesis is to demonstrate through analysis the role of property valuation in family law and in particular retention of the matrimonial home in long-term effects on women following divorce. This can include both financial and non-financial aspects. In order to quantify these aspects, the research in this thesis uses both qualitative and quantitative methods to introduce a set of measurable elements. Data was taken from the Austlii to create a detailed database of 658 cases to be analysed. Quantitative analysis included examination of property valuations put forward to the judge by male and female parties and their effects on final outcomes. Qualitative analysis was conducted with NVivo on a selection of 20 cases from the database in order to identify important themes related to the matrimonial home, valuation, gender roles, socioeconomic factors, and reasoning behind judges’ decisions. Qualitative analysis of a series of interviews with family lawyers, valuers, and clients was also undertaken. Overall findings showed that women are disadvantaged financially following divorce for many reasons, including caretaking duties, limited earning capacity, and career disruptions. There is evidence that judges were aware of such limitations and used these disadvantages as reason to award the women a higher portion of the assets, in particular the matrimonial home. The inference from this evidence does not support the hypothesis of bias against women in the family courts. However, the case studies of women who had been through divorce themselves raised issues that complicate this conclusion. Even when women were awarded the family home, they encountered long-term financial difficulties. From these outcomes, it appears that the strategies used to compensate are not effective in solving the whole problem. Whilst the disadvantage women face has decreased over time, the evidence indicates that there is still scope for improvement.