De facto

Last updated

De facto ( /dˈfækt,di-,də-/ day FAK-toh, dee -; [1] Latin : de facto [deː ˈfaktoː] , "in fact") describes practices that exist in reality, whether or not they are officially recognized by laws or other formal norms. [2] [3] [4] It is commonly used to refer to what happens in practice, in contrast with de jure ("by law"), which refers to things that happen according to official law, regardless of whether the practice exists in reality.



In jurisprudence, it mainly means "practiced, but not necessarily defined by law"[ citation needed ] or "practiced or is valid, but not officially established".[ citation needed ] Basically, this expression is opposed to the concept of "de jure" (which means "as defined by law") when it comes to law, management or technology (such as standards) in the case of creation, development or application of "without" or "against" instructions, but in accordance with "with practice". When legal situations are discussed, "de jure" means "expressed by law", while "de facto" means action or what is practiced. Similar expressions: "essentially", "unofficial", "in fact", "actually".

Technical standards

A de facto standard is a standard (formal or informal) that has achieved a dominant position by tradition, enforcement, or market dominance. It has not necessarily received formal approval by way of a standardization process, and may not have an official standards document.

Technical standards are usually voluntary, such as ISO 9000 requirements, but may be obligatory, enforced by government norms, such as drinking water quality requirements. The term "de facto standard" is used for both: to contrast obligatory standards (also known as "de jure standards"); or to express a dominant standard, when there is more than one proposed standard.

In social sciences, a voluntary standard that is also a de facto standard, is a typical solution to a coordination problem. [5]

Government and culture

National languages

Several countries, including Australia, Japan, Mexico, the United Kingdom and the United States, have a de facto national language but no official, de jure national language.

Some countries have a de facto national language in addition to an official language. In Lebanon and Morocco, the official language is Arabic, but an additional de facto language is also French. In New Zealand, the official languages are Māori and New Zealand Sign Language; however, English is a third de facto language.

Russian was the de facto official language of the central government and, to a large extent, republican governments of the former Soviet Union, but was not declared de jure state language until 1990. A short-lived law, effected April 24, 1990, installed Russian as the sole de jure official language of the Union. [6]

In Hong Kong and Macau, the Special Administrative Regions of the People's Republic of China, the official languages are English and Portuguese respectively, together with Chinese. However, no particular variety of "Chinese" referred to in law is specified. Cantonese (Hong Kong Cantonese) in traditional Chinese characters is the de facto standard in both territories. [7]

Governance and sovereignty

De facto political map of the world, May 2019. De-facto-territory-control-map-of-the-world-borderless-14-05-2019.svg
De facto political map of the world, May 2019.

A de facto government is a government wherein all the attributes of sovereignty have, by usurpation, been transferred from those who had been legally invested with them to others, who, sustained by a power above the forms of law, claim to act and do really act in their stead. [8]

In politics, a de facto leader of a country or region is one who has assumed authority, regardless of whether by lawful, constitutional, or legitimate means; very frequently, the term is reserved for those whose power is thought by some faction to be held by unlawful, unconstitutional, or otherwise illegitimate means, often because it had deposed a previous leader or undermined the rule of a current one. De facto leaders sometimes do not hold a constitutional office and may exercise power informally.

Not all dictators are de facto rulers. For example, Augusto Pinochet of Chile initially came to power as the chairperson of a military junta, which briefly made him de facto leader of Chile, but he later amended the nation's constitution and made himself president until new elections were called, making him the formal and legal ruler of Chile. Similarly, Saddam Hussein's formal rule of Iraq is often recorded as beginning in 1979, the year he assumed the Presidency of Iraq. However, his de facto rule of the nation began earlier: during his time as vice president; he exercised a great deal of power at the expense of the elderly Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, the de jure president.

In Argentina, the successive military coups that overthrew constitutional governments installed de facto governments in 1930–1932, 1943–1946, 1955–1958, 1966–1973 and 1976–1983, the last of which combined the powers of the presidential office with those of the National Congress. The subsequent legal analysis of the validity of such actions led to the formulation of a doctrine of the de facto governments, a case law (precedential) formulation which essentially said that the actions and decrees of past de facto governments, although not rooted in legal legitimacy when taken, remained binding until and unless such time as they were revoked or repealed de jure by a subsequent legitimate government.

That doctrine was nullified by the constitutional reform of 1994. Article 36 states:

  • (1) This Constitution shall rule even when its observance is interrupted by acts of force against the institutional order and the democratic system. These acts shall be irreparably null.
  • (2) Their authors shall be punished with the penalty foreseen in Section 29, disqualified in perpetuity from holding public offices and excluded from the benefits of pardon and commutation of sentences.
  • (3) Those who, as a consequence of these acts, were to assume the powers foreseen for the authorities of this Constitution or for those of the provinces, shall be punished with the same penalties and shall be civil and criminally liable for their acts. The respective actions shall not be subject to prescription.
  • (4) All citizens shall have the right to oppose resistance to those committing the acts of force stated in this section.
  • (5) He who, procuring personal enrichment, incurs in serious fraudulent offense against the Nation shall also attempt subversion against the democratic system, and shall be disqualified to hold public office for the term specified by law.
  • (6) Congress shall enact a law on public ethics which shall rule the exercise of public office.

Two examples of de facto leaders are Deng Xiaoping of the People's Republic of China and general Manuel Noriega of Panama. Both of these men exercised nearly all control over their respective nations for many years despite not having either legal constitutional office or the legal authority to exercise power. These individuals are today commonly recorded as the "leaders" of their respective nations; recording their legal, correct title would not give an accurate assessment of their power. Terms like strongman or dictator are often used to refer to de facto rulers of this sort. In the Soviet Union, after Vladimir Lenin was incapacitated from a stroke in 1923, Joseph Stalin—who, as General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union had the power to appoint anyone he chose to top party positions—eventually emerged as leader of the Party and the legitimate government. Until the 1936 Soviet Constitution officially declared the Party "...the vanguard of the working people", thus legitimising Stalin's leadership, Stalin ruled the USSR as the de facto dictator.

Another example of a de facto ruler is someone who is not the actual ruler but exerts great or total influence over the true ruler, which is quite common in monarchies. Some examples of these de facto rulers are Empress Dowager Cixi of China (for son Tongzhi and nephew Guangxu Emperors), Prince Alexander Menshikov (for his former lover Empress Catherine I of Russia), Cardinal Richelieu of France (for Louis XIII), Queen Elisabeth of Parma (for her husband, King Philip V) and Queen Maria Carolina of Naples and Sicily (for her husband King Ferdinand I of the Two Sicilies).

The term "de facto head of state" is sometimes used to describe the office of a governor general in the Commonwealth realms, since a holder of that office has the same responsibilities in their country as the de jure head of state (the sovereign) does within the United Kingdom.[ citation needed ]

In the Westminster system of government, executive authority is often split between a de jure executive authority of a head of state and a de facto executive authority of a prime minister and cabinet who implement executive powers in the name of the de jure executive authority.[ citation needed ] In the United Kingdom, the Sovereign is the de jure executive authority, even though executive decisions are made by the indirectly elected Prime Minister and his Cabinet on the Sovereign's behalf, hence the term His Majesty's Government.


The de facto boundaries of a country are defined by the area that its government is actually able to enforce its laws in, and to defend against encroachments by other countries that may also claim the same territory de jure. The Durand Line is an example of a de facto boundary. As well as cases of border disputes, de facto boundaries may also arise in relatively unpopulated areas in which the border was never formally established or in which the agreed border was never surveyed and its exact position is unclear. The same concepts may also apply to a boundary between provinces or other subdivisions of a federal state.


In South Africa, although de jure apartheid formally began in 1948, de facto racist policies and practices discriminating against black South Africans, People of Colour, and Indians dated back decades before. [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]

De facto racial discrimination and segregation in the United States (outside of the South) until the 1950s and 1960s was simply discrimination that was not segregation by law (de jure). "Jim Crow laws", which were enacted in the 1870s, brought legal racial segregation against black Americans residing in the American South. These laws were legally ended in 1964 by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. [21] [22] [23]

De facto state of war

Most commonly used to describe large scale conflicts of the 20th century, the phrase de facto state of war refers to a situation where two nations are actively engaging, or are engaged, in aggressive military actions against the other without a formal declaration of war.

In the 21st century, non-state actors and other non-nation state entities are also commonly involved in various conflicts.

Marriage and domestic partnerships


A domestic partner outside marriage is referred to as a de facto husband or wife by some authorities. [24]

In Australia

In Australia and New Zealand, the phrase "de facto" by itself has become a colloquial term for one's domestic partner. [25] In Australian law, it is the legally recognized, committed relationship of a couple living together (opposite-sex or same-sex). [26] De facto unions are defined in the federal Family Law Act 1975. [27] De facto relationships provide couples who are living together on a genuine domestic basis with many of the same rights and benefits as married couples. Two people can become a de facto couple by entering into a registered relationship (i.e.: civil union or domestic partnership) or by being assessed as such by the Family Court or Federal Circuit Court. [28] Couples who are living together are generally recognised as a de facto union and thus able to claim many of the rights and benefits of a married couple, even if they have not registered or officially documented their relationship, [29] although this may vary by state. It has been noted that it is harder to prove de facto relationship status, particularly in the case of the death of one of the partners. [30]

In April 2014, an Australian federal court judge ruled that a heterosexual couple who had a child and lived together for 13 years were not in a de facto relationship and thus the court had no jurisdiction to divide up their property under family law following a request for separation. In his ruling, the judge stated "de facto relationship(s) may be described as ‘marriage like’ but it is not a marriage and has significant differences socially, financially and emotionally." [31]

The above sense of de facto is related to the relationship between common law traditions and formal (statutory, regulatory, civil) law, and common-law marriages. Common law norms for settling disputes in practical situations, often worked out over many generations to establishing precedent, are a core element informing decision making in legal systems around the world. Because its early forms originated in England in the Middle Ages, this is particularly true in Anglo-American legal traditions and in former colonies of the British Empire, while also playing a role in some countries that have mixed systems with significant admixtures of civil law.

Relationships not recognised outside Australia

Due to Australian federalism, de facto partnerships can only be legally recognised whilst the couple lives within a state in Australia. This is because the power to legislate on de facto matters relies on referrals by States to the Commonwealth in accordance with Section 51(xxxvii) of the Australian Constitution, where it states the new federal law can only be applied back within a state. [32] [33] There must be a nexus between the de facto relationship itself and the Australian state. [34]

If an Australian de facto couple moves out of a state, they do not take the state with them and the new federal law is tied to the territorial limits of a state. The legal status and rights and obligations of the de facto or unmarried couple would then be recognised by the laws of the country where they are ordinarily resident.

This is unlike marriage and "matrimonial causes" which are recognised by sections 51(xxi) and (xxii) of the Constitution of Australia [35] and internationally by marriage law and conventions, Hague Convention on Marriages (1978). [36]

Non-marital relationship contract

A de facto relationship is comparable to non-marital relationship contracts (sometimes called "palimony agreements") and certain limited forms of domestic partnership, which are found in many jurisdictions throughout the world.

A de facto Relationship is not comparable to common-law marriage, which is a fully legal marriage that has merely been contracted in an irregular way (including by habit and repute). Only nine U.S. states and the District of Columbia still permit common-law marriage; but common law marriages are otherwise valid and recognised by and in all jurisdictions whose rules of comity mandate the recognition of any marriage that was legally formed in the jurisdiction where it was contracted.

Family law – custody

De facto joint custody is comparable to the joint legal decision-making authority a married couple has over their child(ren) in many jurisdictions (Canada as an example). Upon separation, each parent maintains de facto joint custody, until such time a court order awards custody, either sole or joint.



A de facto monopoly is a system where many suppliers of a product are allowed but the market is so completely dominated by one that the other players are unable to compete or even survive. The related terms oligopoly and monopsony are similar in meaning and this is the type of situation that antitrust laws are intended to eliminate.


In finance, the World Bank has a pertinent definition:

A "de facto government" comes into, or remains in, power by means not provided for in the country's constitution, such as a coup d'état, revolution, usurpation, abrogation or suspension of the constitution. [37]

Intellectual property

In engineering, de facto technology is a system in which the intellectual property and know-how is privately held. Usually only the owner of the technology manufactures the related equipment. Meanwhile, a standard technology consists of systems that have been publicly released to a certain degree so that anybody can manufacture equipment supporting the technology. For instance, in cell phone communications, CDMA1X is a de facto technology, while GSM is a standard technology.


Examples of a de facto General Manager in sports include Syd Thrift who acted as the GM of the Baltimore Orioles between 1999 and 2002. Bill Belichick, the head coach of the New England Patriots in the NFL does not hold the official title of GM, but serves as de facto general manager as he has control over drafting and other personnel decisions.

See also


    Related Research Articles

    A head of state is the public persona who officially embodies a state in its unity and legitimacy. Depending on the country's form of government and separation of powers, the head of state may be a ceremonial figurehead or concurrently the head of government and more.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Sovereignty</span> Supreme authority within a territory, as well as external autonomy from other states

    Sovereignty is the defining authority within individual consciousness, social construct, or territory. Sovereignty entails hierarchy within the state, as well as external autonomy for states. In any state, sovereignty is assigned to the person, body, or institution that has the ultimate authority over other people in order to establish a law or change existing laws. In political theory, sovereignty is a substantive term designating supreme legitimate authority over some polity. In international law, sovereignty is the exercise of power by a state. De jure sovereignty refers to the legal right to do so; de facto sovereignty refers to the factual ability to do so. This can become an issue of special concern upon the failure of the usual expectation that de jure and de facto sovereignty exist at the place and time of concern, and reside within the same organization.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Statute of Westminster 1931</span> United Kingdom legislation

    The Statute of Westminster 1931 is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that sets the basis for the relationship between the Commonwealth realms and the Crown.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Westminster system</span> Parliamentary system of government

    The Westminster system or Westminster model is a type of parliamentary government that incorporates a series of procedures for operating a legislature. This concept was first developed in England.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Civil union</span> Legal union similar to marriage

    A civil union is a legally recognized arrangement similar to marriage, created primarily as a means to provide recognition in law for same-sex couples. Civil unions grant some or all of the rights of marriage except child adoption and/or the title itself.

    Common-law marriage, also known as non-ceremonial marriage, sui iuris marriage, informal marriage, or marriage by habit and repute, is a legal framework where a couple may be considered married without having formally registered their relation as a civil or religious marriage.

    A domestic partnership is a legal relationship, usually between couples, who live together and share a common domestic life, but are not married. People in domestic partnerships receive benefits that guarantee right of survivorship, hospital visitation, and other rights.

    An ex post facto law is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law. In criminal law, it may criminalize actions that were legal when committed; it may aggravate a crime by bringing it into a more severe category than it was in when it was committed; it may change the punishment prescribed for a crime, as by adding new penalties or extending sentences; or it may alter the rules of evidence in order to make conviction for a crime likelier than it would have been when the deed was committed.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Spain</span> Principles, institutions and law of political governance in Spain

    The Spanish Constitution is the democratic law that is supreme in the Kingdom of Spain. It was enacted after its approval in a constitutional referendum, and it is the culmination of the Spanish transition to democracy. The Constitution of 1978 is one of about a dozen of other historical Spanish constitutions and constitution-like documents; however, it is one of two fully democratic constitutions. It was sanctioned by King Juan Carlos I on 27 December, and published in the Boletín Oficial del Estado on 29 December, the date on which it became effective. The promulgation of the constitution marked the culmination of the Spanish transition to democracy after the death of general Francisco Franco, on 20 November 1975, who ruled over Spain as a military dictator for nearly 40 years. This led to the country undergoing a series of political, social and historical changes that transformed the Francoist regime into a democratic state.

    An entrenched clause or entrenchment clause of a constitution is a provision that makes certain amendments either more difficult or impossible to pass. Overriding an entrenched clause may require a supermajority, a referendum, or the consent of the minority party. The term eternity clause is used in a similar manner in the constitutions of Brazil, the Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, India, Iran, Italy, Morocco, Norway, and Turkey, but specifically applies to an entrenched clause that can never be overridden. However, if a constitution provides for a mechanism of its own abolishment or replacement, like the German Basic Law does in Article 146, this by necessity provides a "back door" for getting rid of the "eternity clause", too.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Victoria State Government</span> State government of Victoria, Australia

    The Victoria State Government, also referred to as just the Victorian Government, is the state-level authority for Victoria, Australia. Like all state governments, it is formed by three independent branches: the executive, the judicial, and the parliament.

    Section 51(xxxvii) of the Constitution of Australia is a provision in the Australian Constitution which empowers the Australian Parliament to legislate on matters referred to it by any state. As Australia is a federation, both states and the Commonwealth have legislative power, and the Australian Constitution limits Commonwealth power. Section 51(xxxvii) allows for a degree of flexibility in the allocation of legislative powers.

    Australian family law is principally found in the federal Family Law Act 1975 and the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Rules 2021 as well as in other laws and the common law and laws of equity, which affect the family and the relationship between those people, including when those relationships end. Most family law is practised in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia and the Family Court of Western Australia. Australia recognises marriages entered into overseas as well as divorces obtained overseas if they were effected in accordance with the laws of that country. Australian marriage and "matrimonial causes" are recognised by sections 51(xxi) and (xxii) of the Constitution of Australia and internationally by marriage law and conventions, such as the Hague Convention on Marriages (1978).

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Marriage law</span> Overview of marriage law worldwide

    Marriage law refers to the legal requirements that determine the validity of a marriage, and which vary considerably among countries. See also Marriage Act.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">Family Law Act 1975</span>

    The Family Law Act 1975(Cth) is an Act of the Parliament of Australia. It has 15 parts and is the primary piece of legislation dealing with divorce, parenting arrangements between separated parents, property separation, and financial maintenance involving children or divorced or separated de facto partners: in Australia. It also covers family violence. It came into effect on 5 January 1976, repealing the Matrimonial Causes Act 1961, which had been largely based on fault. On the first day of its enactment, 200 applications for divorce were filed in the Melbourne registry office of the Family Court of Australia, and 80 were filed in Adelaide, while only 32 were filed in Sydney.

    Same-sex marriage in Australia has been legal since 9 December 2017. Legislation to allow same-sex marriage, the Marriage Amendment Act 2017, passed the Australian Parliament on 7 December 2017 and received royal assent from the Governor-General the following day. The law came into effect on 9 December, immediately recognising overseas same-sex marriages. The first same-sex wedding under Australian law was held on 15 December 2017. The passage of the law followed a voluntary postal survey of all Australians, in which 61.6% of respondents supported legalisation of same-sex marriage.

    Calder v. Bull, 3 U.S. 386 (1798), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court decided four important points of constitutional law.

    Sources of law are the origins of laws, the binding rules that enable any state to govern its territory.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">On the Restoration of Independence of the Republic of Latvia</span> 1990 Latvian Supreme Council decree providing a legal rationale for independence from the USSR

    The Declaration "On the Restoration of Independence of the Republic of Latvia" was adopted on 4 May 1990 by the Supreme Soviet of the Latvian SSR in which Latvia declared independence from the Soviet Union. The Declaration stated that, although Latvia had de facto lost its independence in 1940, when it was annexed by the Soviet Union, the country had de jure remained a sovereign country as the annexation had been unconstitutional and against the will of the Latvian people. It asserted the priority of the basics of the international law over the national laws and therefore it resolved that the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact and the Soviet occupation of Latvia in 1940 were illegal. It also asserted that the heavily rigged 1940 elections were illegal and unconstitutional, and that all acts of the People's Saeima chosen at that election–including the request to join the Soviet Union on 21 July 1940–were ipso facto void.

    <span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in the Northern Territory</span>

    Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons in Australia's Northern Territory enjoy the same legal rights as non-LGBT residents. The liberalisation of the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in Australia's Northern Territory has been a gradual process. Homosexual activity was legalised in 1983, with an equal age of consent since 2003. Same-sex couples are recognised as de facto relationships. There was no local civil union or domestic partnership registration scheme before the introduction of nationwide same-sex marriage in December 2017, following the passage of the Marriage Amendment Act 2017 by the Australian Parliament. The 2017 Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey, designed to gauge public support for same-sex marriage in Australia, returned a 60.6% "Yes" response in the territory. LGBT people are protected from discrimination by both territory and federal law, though the territory's hate crime law does not cover sexual orientation or gender identity. The territory was the last jurisdiction in Australia to legally allow same-sex couples to adopt children.


    1. Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary. S.v. "de facto." Retrieved January 12, 2018
    2. "de facto". Retrieved 25 February 2017.
    3. See I. 3. "de". Oxford English Dictionary (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. 1989.
    4. Harper, Douglas. "de facto". Online Etymology Dictionary .
    5. Edna Ullmann-Margalit: The Emergence of Norms, Oxford Un. Press, 1977. (or Clarendon Press 1978)
    6. "USSR Law "On the Languages of the Peoples of USSR"" (in Russian). April 24, 1990. Archived from the original on 2009-06-18.
    7. Mair, Victor (1 July 2017). "Cantonese: Still the Native Language of Hong Kong". Language Log .
    8. 30 Am Jur 181. Law Dictionary, James A. Ballentine, Second Edition, 1948, p. 345.
    9. R.W. Lee. "Introduction to Roman-Dutch Law". Oxford, Clarendon Press. Retrieved 27 March 2011.
    10. A. Du Toit, H.B. Giliomee (1983). Afrikaner political thought: analysis and documents. University of California Press. ISBN   978-0-520-04319-0.
    11. Gish, Steven (2000). Alfred B. Xuma: African, American, South African. New York University Press. p. 8.
    12. Hoiberg, Dale; Ramchandani, Indu (2000). Students' Britannica India, Volumes 1–5. Popular Prakashan. p. 142.
    13. Allen, John (2005). Apartheid South Africa: An Insider's Overview of the Origin And Effects of Separate Development. iUniverse. p. xi.
    14. Nojeim, Michael J. (2004). Gandhi and King: the power of nonviolent resistance. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 127.
    15. Leach, Graham (1986). South Africa: no easy path to peace. Routledge. p. 68.
    16. Tankard, Keith (9 May 2004). Chapter 9 The Natives (Urban Areas) Act Archived 20 November 2008 at the Wayback Machine . Rhodes University.
    17. Baroness Young – Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (4 July 1986). vol 477 cc1159-250. Hansard.
    18. The Representation of Natives Act. Archived 13 October 2006 at the Wayback Machine
    19. Reddy, E.S (n.d.). "Indian passive resistance in South Africa, 1946–1948". SA History. Retrieved 23 February 2015.
    20. Ambrosio, Thomas (2002). Ethnic identity groups and U.S. foreign policy. Greenwood Publishing Group. pp. 56–57.
    21. "Civil Rights Act of 1964". Archived from the original on 2010-10-21. Retrieved 2010-11-04.
    22. Woodward, C. Vann; McFeely, William S. (2001). The Strange Career of Jim Crow. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 7. ISBN   0-19-514689-1.
    23. King, Desmond (1995). Separate and Unequal: Black Americans and the US Federal Government . New York: Oxford University Press. p.  3. ISBN   0-19-828016-5.
    24. Walker Lenore E. "Battered Woman Syndrome. Empirical Findings." Violence and Exploitation Against Women and Girls, November 2006, p. 142.
    25. Gulliver, Katrina (31 January 2003). "De facto is a defective description – just say living in sin". Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 29 August 2016. I am curious about the use of the term "de facto". It is an adjective meaning "in fact" – as opposed to "in law". It is used by Australian journalists when describing (other people's) domestic partners. I have never heard anyone say "my de facto". It is a brief way of saying "living with someone but not actually married". Despite being an adjective, it never seems to be used with a noun, but on its own...
    26. "What are your rights when a de facto relationship ends?". ABC News. 22 June 2017. Retrieved 16 September 2017.
    27. "Family Law Act 1975 – Sect. 4AA".
    28. "De facto Relationships". Family Court of Australia.
    29. "De facto Relationships". The Law Society of New South Wales. Archived from the original on 2017-02-10. Retrieved 2017-09-16.
    30. Elphick, Liam. "Do same-sex couples really have the same rights as married couples?". SBS News. Retrieved 15 September 2017.
    31. "De facto couples have differences to married counterparts, judge says". The Australian . 23 April 2014. Archived from the original on 4 May 2014.
    32. French, Justice (Feb 2003). "The Referral of State Powers Cooperative Federalism lives?". Western Australia Law Review..
    33. Thomas (2007) 233 CLR 307, [208] (Kirby J).
    34. See sections 90RG, 90SD and 90SK, section 90RA, of the Family Law Act.
    35. Section 51, Australian Constitution
    36. Hague Convention on Marriages 1978
    37. "OP 7.30 – Dealings with De Facto Governments". Operational Manual. The World Bank. July 2001. Archived from the original on 2017-10-11. Retrieved 2010-11-28.